Skip to main content

Full text of "The Earth Journal Flat Earth Zetetics Blount 1895 Vols 3-6"

See other formats



Two lines of not more than 2() words 
Every additional line of SO words 
Every additional 10 words after the first 50 
Ouarter of a page ... 

Half page- 
Whole page .. 


One Copy, post free, for One Year, 1/6 ; or 57 cents. ' J . 

1 Copy per month for One Year, post free . . . ... 

2 Copies ,, ,, ,, ... ... , 

5 „ „ „ ,, .:. 

Copies of “ The Earth" may be had of Tilt Fix, K.A.M.B., 
//, Gloucester Road, Kingston Hill; at the Office where it is 
printed; or op Mr. JOHN WILLIAMS, Redland Grove, 
Carlton , Notts,; Mk. O’IN I ELL, 7, Manor Road, Boives 
llctrk, London, N. Jonathan iNicuOXsox; Ksg.', -77, Ct. 
Eastern House, Bishopsgate Street , London; and Lady 
Blount, Kingston Hill; Mr. G. F. Best, Northam, Urst 
Australia. . . • 

N.B.—All communications should be addressed to E.A.M.B ., 
11, Gloucester Road, Kingston Hilt, England. 

Postal Orders should be made payable to E. A. M. BLOC TV 1 , 
Post Office, Kingston Hill, Surrey, England. 

Treasurer Universal Zetetic Society ; 

Lady Blount, ii, Gloucester Road, Kingston Hill. 

Secretary Universal Zetetic Society : 

Walter on BUJUXT, Ksg. 

, Printing Works, /■> Kingston Road, Wimbledon. 



Nos. 25 & 26. 


To the reflective mind it must always be a matter of much 
wonder and astonishment, why there should be so much 
opposition to the clear statements of the Almighty, in those 
things that lie, of His infinite condescension, has been 
pleased to reveal to His creature, Man. The reason would 
assuredly be, the desperately evil condition of the human 

Had there been in revelation given, and had man been 
left to himself, it is frightful to contemplate the utter chaos 
in which the human race would now be ; but thanks be unto 
the Divine Father, Who has not left us in doubt, but has 
clearly revealed his purposes and intentions concerning us 
and the world generally. He has given to us His laws ! 
revealed to us His Creation, His Redemption, and His 
sanctification ; and described to us His unspeakable love 
for the whole of His creatures. 

As regards Creation and that which he clearly sets forth, 
it strikes one as simply marvellous how finite man has ven¬ 
tured to set aside His statement of facts and substituted 
fables ; and all this has been done, not by ignorant men, but 
by those esteemed as men of learning and repute, and all 
under the name of science. Does this not remind us of the 
Apostle’s warning respecting “ vain babblings, and opposi¬ 
tions of science falsely so called ” ? 

God has been careful to “ teach man know ledge,” and 
has spoken of the Earth, which He formed, some five hundred 
times, and yet has not given us the most remote idea of the 
world being a sphere in motion. 

Scientific Astronomy ignores the multitudes of Scripture 
passages to which we might refer, and would appear to 
consider the Word of God as quite unworthy of consideration. 

In place of the simple and clear facts put before us by 
God Himself, we are asked to relinquish all that, together 
with our common sense. To do this we must, in a word, 



close our Bibles for good, and henceforth ignore Him both 
as Creator and Redeemer of our race, and set up man as 
our leader, teacher, and guide ! 

The clear utterances of the Divine Book are, however, in 
harmony with our senses and reason, and the more we study 
it, the more we find it so. “ God called the dry land earth ; 
and the gathering together of the waters called he seas ; 
and God saw that it was good.”— Gen. i. 9, 10. 

“ Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or 
any likeness of anything that is in heaven ABOVE, or that 
is in the earth BENEATH, or that is in the waters UNDER 
the earth.”— Ex. xx. 4. 

“ The earth is the Lord's and the fulness thereof; the 
world, and they that dwell therein : For he hath founded it 
upon the seas, and established it upon the floods. Ps. 
xxiv. 1, 2. 

“To him that s tretchetk out the earth above the waters. 

Ps. cxxxvi. “The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, 
and hasteth to his place where he arose.”— heel. i. 5. 

The sun, moon, and stars are stated to be made for the 
world. “ And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament 
of the heaven, to divide the day from the night; and let 
them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years : 
and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven, to 
give light upon the earth : and it was so. And God made 
TWO great lights ; the greater light to rule the da)', and the 
lesser light to rule the night ; the stars also. And God set 
them in the firmament of the heaven, to give light upon the 
earth , and to rule over the day and over the night, and to 
divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it 
was good.”— Gen. i. 14-17. 

When we try to realize the statements and figures given 
by astronomers regarding the bulk and magnitude of the 
heavenly bodies, and their distances, we are simply amazed 
and find it impossible to reconcile their statements with the 
definite language of the Bible, which, by the way, has been 
truly said by another, to be the “ best book on astronomy 
the world has ever seen.” 

“For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven. '1 hy 
faithfulness, is unto all generations ; thou hast ESTABLISHED 
the earth, and it standeth. They continue this day accord¬ 
ing to thy ordinances : for all are thy servants.’ Ps. cxix. 


__ r J 

89-91. The Scriptures teach that the sun, moon, and stars 
have motion, but nowhere do they suggest that the world 
we inhabit has an) - . 

If modern astronomical science be true, then how are we to 
understand such passages as Isaiah lx. 19, 20 ; Rev. vi. 12- 
14, xxi. 2, 3, and many others ? 

Regarding Rev. vi. 12-14, the late Rev. Thomas Scott, 
comments thus : “ the civil and religious state of the world, 
attended with vast commotions of every kind. The ‘ extreme 
blackness of the sun’ and ‘the moon becoming blood,’ 
denote the extinction, with horror and bloodshed, of the 
more exalted and conspicuous persons, such as emperors 
and their chief ministers, officers, and nobles : the falling ‘ of 
the stars’ was emblematical of the degradation, or death of the 
illustrious in great numbers, such as magistrates and sena¬ 
tors.” I need quote no more ! When will men believe that 
the Lord says what He means, and means what He has said. 
Brighton. MAJ.-GEN. E. ARMSTRONG. 

[Commentators too often make the Word of God of none 
effect by their traditions.— Ed.] 


By a Christian Observer in London by day and 
night, known as The Man About Town. 

On Sunday, June 8th, the following announcement was 
posted outside Christ Church, Peckham, Free Protestant 
Church of England (Rev. J. McMillan, Incumbent):—“ Lady 
Blount, D.V., will give an address ; subject—“ Bible Cosmog¬ 
ony. Chairman : The Right Rev. James Martin, D.I)., LL.IJ., 
supported by Bishop Mac Laglen, Archbishop Stevens,” &c. 

In the body of the church were many well-known friends, 
and a good company of strangers. The meeting was com¬ 
menced by the singing of the well-known hymn, “ O God, 
our help in ages past,” followed by prayer, offered by Bishop 



Martin. The chairman then read the first chapter of Genesis 
—commenting upon its historical grandeur—and, in intro¬ 
ducing to the audience Lady Blount, said that he had heard 
of her in the literary world, also had experienced great plea¬ 
sure in reading some of her writings, and he felt sure they 
would say at the close of the meeting they had listened to 
one who had mastered the great subject of “ Biblical Cos¬ 
mogony.” He had therefore great pleasure in calling upon 
her ladyship to deliver the address. 

Lady Blount—after expressing, in well chosen words, the 
joy she felt in being present—at once (like a great master 
builder) commenced to lay her foundations, all the names 
of the stones being taken from the Eternal Armoury, “The 
Word of the Living Father, God.” Some of the stones 
given being so upheld as to receive the admiration of all 
privileged to hear the address, which proved the Earth to 
have immovable foundations as follows :—“ The pillars 
of the earth are the Lord’s, and he hath set the world upon 
them.”—I Sam. ii. 8. “Yea, mine hand hath laid the 
foundation of the earth.” —Isa. xlviii. 13. “ He hath founded 
the earth upon her bases that it should not be removed for 
ever.”— Ps. civ. 5. “ Thou hast established the earth, and it 
abidcth.”— Ps. cxix. go. “ He hath founded it upon the seas, 
and established it upon the floods.”— Ps. xxiv. 2. “ The 

world also is established that it cannot be moved.”— Ps. 
xci. 1, & xcvi. 10. “Where wast thou when I laid the foun¬ 
dations of the earth? Declare, if thou hast understanding, 
who determined the measures thereof if thou knowest ?—or, 
who stretched the line upon it ? Whereupon were the 
sockets made to sink ?—or, who laid the corner-stone there¬ 
of ?”— fob xxxviii. 4-6. “Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast 
laid the foundation of the earth.”— Heb. i. 10. 

From these Scriptures the unbiased enquirer and believer 
in God’s Word cannot but take it for granted that the Earth 
has foundations, yet the question arises : To what are these 
foundations fixed ? For there is no stability in water by 
which the Earth could be firmly held. To this query her 
ladyship answered that the Bible does not say that the Earth 
is fixed to the waters, or seas, but that it is founded upon 
(or over) them, which, from other Scriptures previously men¬ 
tioned, is known to be positively true. In Ex. xx. 4, and 
Dent. v. 8, we read of “ the water under the earth.” 



The noted “ Parallax ” had said that “the Earth was like 
a hime floating island, buoyed up by the waters, and held 
in its place by long spurs of land shooting into the icy 
barriers of the southern circumference.” 

Lady Blount dealt very beautifully with other passages 
than those quoted, going on to say that the human mind 
utterly fails in attempting to solve the great problem of God’s 
oreatness. It becomes lost like a little child in a pathless 
desert ; but this fact offers no reason for accepting any theory 
which is not in accord with God’s Word, and there is 
nothing to justify the argument of “ accommodation,” used 
by some, especially by scientific parsons, that “ of course God 
knew that the world goes round the sun,” notwithstanding 
the statement in the Bible that the sun goes round it. 
Such prevarication as this, her ladyship said, appeared to 
her to be nothing less than making a liar of Him of whom 
it is written : “ It is impossible tor God to lie,” {Heb. vi. 18.) 
and it requires to be treated with the contempt that it de¬ 
serves, seeing that it is a slander upon the character of the 
Holy God to insinuate that He would thus lend Himself to 
such a Jesuitical and, at the same time, useless deception. 

[ his conclusion brought with it the obvious deduction that 
“ we cannot serve two masters ; we cannot believe that the 
Bible and modern astronomy are both true—for the teaching 
of the one is diametrically opposed to the other.” Even 
Thomas Paine clearly saw this years ago, when he wrote in 
The Age oj Reason : “ Two opposing beliefs cannot be held 
together in the same mind; he who thinks he can believe 
both has thought very little of either!' 

As Gcd so distinctly declares that of old He “ laid the 
foundations of the earth,” {Ps. cii. 5), do not let us be so 
sinful and foolish as to say that He did not ! Only shame 
and confusion of face can be expected to follow those who 
defiantly reject the revealed Word of the Only True and 
Living God for the contradictory theories of dying men. 

Her ladyship went on to say that no waters could possibly 
exist “ under” and form the chief part of a revolving planet ; 
but waters do exist under the Earth ; therefore the Earth 
is not a revolving planet. 

The lecturer then dealt with the Law of Perspective. This 
law meets 11s on every hand. It cannot be gainsaid. II, 


for instance, on a straight road we observe a row of lamps, 
which are all of the same size, we shall find that, from our 
standpoint, their height will gradually diminish as we look 
toward the further end ; but, if we ourselves approach to 
that end, the nearer we get to it the higher proportionately 
will the lamps appear. It is the same law which makes the 
hills sink to the horizon as the observer recedes, which ex¬ 
plains how the ship's hull disappears in the offing ; but when 
the sea is undisturbed by waves the hull can be restored to 
sight, by the aid of a good telescope, long after it has dis¬ 
appeared from the naked eye, thus proving that the ship 
has not gone down behind the watery hill of a convex globe, 
but is still sailing on the level of a plane sea. 

Lady Blount concluded a very earnest address by saying 
that truth undivided was more essential to all men than 
merely a part of it ; but men had departed from the glorious 
truth of Creation. Of course there was such a thing as true 
science ; yet anything which contradicted the Bible, whether 
it be labelled science, or whatever it may be called, must be 
false. The modern scientist and the present-day atheist 
both contradict the Word of the Living Father—God—when 
they deny the writing of God through IVIoses; for Moses 
was the mouthpiece of the Deity. 

The discussion which followed the address was sustained 
by Dr. Ilaughton, Ph. D., The Most Rev. Dr. Stevens, Abp. 
and Pat., and several others, including the Rev. Dr. de 
Learey of the Established Church. 

It was the best meeting of the season, much interest being 


This is an excellent subject whereby to utterly disprove 
the possibility of the Earth being the globe that Geographers 
and so-called Scientists have demonstrated it to be, with, 
or by means of their ridiculous and badly constructed 

The very first feature that strikes a critical person on 


looking at a diagram by an upholder of the globular system, 
is that the diagram is wrongly constructed, and the 
argument based upon it—both is, and must be totally op¬ 
posed to sense and reason. Indeed, so utterly and marvel¬ 
lously astray are these Scientists in their attempts at 
Geometrical diagrams of the very simplest and commonest 
order, that one might fairly argue that they had never studied 
practical Geometry. 

Of course some of these individuals are called “ astrono¬ 
mers ” and “ scientists,” and have big titles such as “ sir,” 
and even “ lord,” tacked to their names, but this last piti¬ 
ful feature only shews what a miserable use has been hitherto 
made of the peerage. 

There is, however, Balm in Gilead, or the promise of some 
to come—in that only a few days ago the London Press had 
an article on the piercing scrutiny which His Majesty King 
Edward the VII., intended in future to exert in the direction 
of individuals recommended for a Peerage! Good ! This 
is encouraging, and I earnestly hope that 11 is Majesty willl 
look closely into Geometrical figures and their printed lines, 
and examine all that is presented as sense and reason. 
In fact it stands to reason that there is no reason why a 
person should affect to be possessed of mental superiority— 
which his promotion to the peerage would infer—if, as the 
result of a piercing scrutiny, it is found that his diagrams are 
miserable pretences and his arguments totally deficient in 
either sense or reason. We have had enough Peerages of 
the Lord Astronomer kind, and the Education of the future 
can well be spared any more, purely conjectural. Sir Barts, or 
profoundly telescopic Milords. 

And now to return more directly to the subject-matter in 
hand—can signalling by Heliograph be conducted on a 
Globe ? I say, without a shadow of hesitation, that such a 
thing is totally impossible and never has been thus conducted, 
and never will, or can be ! And in support of my assertion, 
I advance a diagram which con not be gainsaid, or explained 
away truthfully and in keeping with sense and reason. 

And of Diagrams I may as well say at once, that diagrams 
representing cuts of the Earth as a globe, are perforce too 
small, that a scale of elevations cannot be obtained ; and al¬ 
so it happens fortunately that the loss of the scale is of no 




importance. In that which we have to deal with are directions 
as lines of sight, and these can be perfectly portrayed and 
described without a correct scientific and artistic scale. 
The latter would call for a figure on a four foot diameter, 
and is thus totally out of the question for ordinary book 

Luckily, directions are all that we require to enable us 
to discuss this crucial subject, and I may point out that my at¬ 
tention has been drawn to it, by a supposed, and l may even 
add, assumed criticism on Mr. Winship’s Rook, “ Zetetic 

Cosmogony.” „ T 

I have not uptothe present read Zetetic Cosmogony. Rut 1 
have done better. I have myself written up the subjects, 
or some of them, which it sets forth, and undertakes to 
champion. These manuscripts of mine are hidden away in 
the mysterious hiding-places of some thirty years ago but 
though I cannot immediately lay my hands on them, or refei 
to my then written investigations, I can nevertheless well 
remember the results I arrived at, and these results appeal 
to me to tally exceeding well with the peeps into Mr. Win- 
ship’s book, which a chapter in the last issue of 7 he Earth 
permits me to indulge. 

This chapter is signed “Engineer.” Why or how it is 
that people cannot sign their own names to their articles, is 
to me, one of the social problems of the age we live m . t 
is not that they need the necessary vanity, because it is plain 
to be seen that they possess a perennial spring of the latter— 
but probably they think their articles so crushing and so 
forcible, and so cruelly critical, that the extra ponderosity ot 
their overwhelming name, or names, is not required to utter¬ 
ly obliterate the person or book they, (as they suppose), 
graciously deign to notice, and pass as an allowed addition 
to the currant literature of the moment. 

Perhaps it is that this kind of critic has a secret silent 
passive pleasure in not revealing the sword which slaughteis 
the unslayable, but to him, butterfly author. Well perhaps 
this is it, and perhaps “ Engineer” will have a kindred glee 
in not having revealed himself so far. What is he kin 
enough to say of Mr. Winship and his (I am confident) clever 
book Zetetic Cosmogony Well, he commences in the usual 
style with a heavy apologetic statement that he has “no idea or 
wish to depreciate the said work,” but at page 6 he finds Mi. 


' 9 

Winship all astray about “ Spectrum Analysis,” and says 
that he has quite forgotten certain dark lines between the 
colours, and that these dark lines are what denote the various 
metals or substances composing the light under observation. 

Now this, I am confident, is a bold speculative venture on 
the part of “ Engineer,” which has cropped up in his own 
mind, or else is that mysterious speculative system which 
is so profusely scattered over the books of Professors on 
Spectrum Analysis. 

I happen to agree entirely with Mr. Winship. 

I found as the result of my investigation, firstly, that any 
light answers, and that a farthing tallow dip does duty 
wonderfully well for the sun. 

Reing myself a little startled at the above discovery, I 
progressed to a second discovery, which is very disastrous to 
Professors on this subject of Spectrum Analysis—and this 
second discovery consists in finding that the numerous 
colours produced do really proceed from the prism itself, and 
neither from the sun nor from the dutiful tallow dip. 

Now prisms vary in amount and depth of colour, but 
almost any clear substance will answer the purpose sufficiently. 
I'or instance, the ordinary glass rests used on dinner tables 
for large or carving forks and knives, make excellent prisms, 
and will, with a little mancEuvring, reflect all the colours of 
the rainbow ; and beyond these colours I do not believe in 
any others, except such as are artificially contrived by vari¬ 
ous positions of several prisms. 

I believe spectrum analysis to be a mere childish amuse¬ 
ment, and that the colours do not point to any metals as 
forming the component parts of the sun or the farthing dip 
either. Pray what metal is the tallow dip made of? I ask 
the Professor in his dark-room —in which his lectures were 
mostly given, as well as I remember. What connection 
could there be between a dark-room and sunlight ? And 
how dare he say that the colours thrown on the screen by 
the mere prism itself can be used to determine what metals 
exist in the sun ? How absurd and childish ! Then again, 
the dark room is totally against sunlight, and it finally ap¬ 
pears that the light really made use of by this unblushing 
Professor in his highly scientific lectures, was in reality an 
electric lamp : thus the Professor argued that the light of 
his lamp was the same as sunlight, and further, that the 

signalling; iiv heliograph, 

i o 

colours—which as a mere matter of course proceeded from 
the prism—represented the scientific dissection of the light 
itself. I wonder that he did not take out a patent for 
making primitive metals from farthing dips and electric 
lamps ! I forgot to record which colour came from gold, or 
how we were to know if diamonds existed in the sun. 
Wonderful professor—and dark in more senses than one was 
his darkened cell at the Polytechnic. 

It is to be hoped that His Majesty will cast a most pene¬ 
trating glance at professors of this t> pe before he bestows 
peerages on them, and that nice little solatium of, say, a 
neat .£100,000 apiece. 

And now to advance further and more directly towards 
the diagrams by “ Engineer,” and which I find printed at 
page 205 in The Earth for June (our June, too, of 1902) 
our amazing frosty June of snow, and even ice—well, well, 
perhaps the diagram has done it. Who can tell ? Put June 
and the diagram go hand in hand as being extraordinary. 

Now this diagram—which the Ed. can reprint—pretends 
to prove that signalling by Heliograph is quite feasible on 
a globe, and the diagram itself is no doubt by “ Engineer, 
as he calls it his own sketch at page 205, line 6 . 

Firstly to touch on the word “ sketch." 

This word exactly hits oft ever)- astronomical or globular 
diagram that I have ever encountered. They are sketches 
pure and simple, a real scale being out of the question as 

But just for that reason “ Engineer ” should not have ven¬ 
tured upon distances which are very misleading. for 
instance the curve marked 183 miles is really much nearer 
2,000 miles, while the elevation A E would be more like 
700 miles than 7,418 feet ; and though these features hardly 
interefere with the diagram, one way or the other, still it 
remains that they do exhibit the balance or want of balance 
of “ Engineer ” himself. 

And now, what does he say? Well, speaking of the 
curvature of 183 miles, he terms it the sea level, and if it 
represents all ocean no doubt such would be the case on a 
globe, but in the very next line he says that it would be 
rather less. This is certainly extraordinary, and shows want 
of mental balance. Clearly the distance of 183 miles cannot 
be the sea level and at the same time rather less ! But this 


' I I 

is the genuine language of the globite, and the books of 
professor after professor are full of contradictions of this 
nature, and which they (the professors) seem to regard 
as the proper thing. 

And now to proceed once more—or try to at least—for 
probably “ Engineer” will not allow me to get far. 

Well, speaking of the elevation A E, he says that the eye 
of a person looking towards B would strike the horizon at 
105 miles at the point D, and on his sketch —I should think 
it is a sketch indeed—he has really made one critical remark. 
Now considering that the curve marked 183 miles is really 
nearer 2,000 miles, it is quite plain that such a petty distance 
as 105 miles could not be represented at all on the diagram. 

Secondly “ Engineer ” has no justification for such a dis¬ 
tance as 105 miles, nor yet for the one of 81 miles. The 
distances would of course depend upon how far apart the 
elevations marked A and D really are. He calls the distance 
183 miles as the curve, and he clearly imagines that a 
straight shot from A to D must of course be less than the 
curve, and on the strength of this he allows himself to ram¬ 
ble through a lot of useless figures, and arrives at the con¬ 
clusion that the distance should be modified to 105 miles! 

Sad—very sad ! 

A glance at my diagram will show that the only straight 
shot possible between the two stations is arrived at by 
giving the second prominence , marked BD on my diagram, 
much more elevation up to C than the first AG, and that 
the straight line AC, connecting the two elevations, is in 
reality longer than the curve GB of my decently correct 

Moreover, the line EC in my diagram marks the ground 
horizon of the elevated observer at A, and below that line 
it is not possible for him to see at all. The consequence is 
that he could not possibly signal by heliograph to an ob¬ 
server at D on the elevation BD, because he cannot see 
through the ground horizon , and thus conveniently look down, 
as it were, to the station D. 

Also the horizon of a person at A always forms a right 
angle with his line of elevation. Every field surveyor knows 
this, or will see the truth of it after a trifling reflection. 

Strictly speaking, an observer at A has a sky horizon 
also, in addition to his terrestrial or ground horizon, and 



this is shown in the dotted line at right angles to AE, but 
in that the observer may look down , instead of looking 
horizontally into the far distance, so he may look toward C 
as his lowest, and below that he cannot by any possibility see. 

Thus signalling by heliograph on a globe is shown to be 
utterly and totally impossible from two such stations as A 
and D, whilst the extension of B D up to C and through 
the dotted continuation will measure close on 5,000 miles, 
and this enormous distance renders the possibility of sig¬ 
nalling from A to the extended elevation BC, or simply C, 

This diagram is also useful as shewing that even wireless 
telegraphy could not be conducted between the two stations 
A and D, but only from A to C some 9,000 miles—and 
wireless telegraphy is conducted at very great distances— 
and in itself proves that the Earth is not a globe, such as is 
generally received. 

I am, 



Recently the bookish community in this country have 
been again wailing about the time not being far distant when 
the mass of literature sent in will overwhelm the space which 
can be allotted to it at the British Museum. 

Up to the present the authorities appear to be at a loss 
what to do in the matter, thongh a suggestion from a mere 
plebeian is treated with the usual lofty disdain, especially as 
one of the most darling idols of modern thought would 
receive such a staggering blow that irreparable ruin would 
be the fate of the world’s most curious curiosity. 

Nevertheless, the suggestion is here made public property, 
notwithstanding its being ignored by the powers that be, 
and such a man as the late Right Hon. VV. E. Gladstone 
some years ago, when this same book trouble was being 
lamented upon by that gentleman, who evidently had the 
confidence to be a most verbose talker on minor things, but 
appeared very timorous of idol smashing, or other heroic 



The suggestion advanced was that a perfectly unbiased 
committee should be formed of men of all grades of thought, 
including the late John Hampden and one other well-known 
pianist, which committee should have full powers to go 
through the library of the British Museum, and get together 
all the modern works which have been written on , or have 
the “ Newtonian Theory ” of the world being a globe as a 
base. This selection would necessarily include tons of books 
on such absurd theoretical subjects as Universal Giavitation, 
Atomic Origins, Evolution, Geology, Astronomy, Pluralities 
of Worlds, and other wonderful phantasies too numerous to 
mention ; then after mature unbiassed cogitation, these books 
should be removed to a warehouse in some deer forest 01 
other depopulated stretch of country, or to avoid any more 
trouble it would be advisable to ship and throw them ovet- 
board in Mid-Atlantic. 

By such a remedy many miles of valuable bookshelf room 
would become available, to store for many years books of 
real and lasting value. 

The rubbish being cleared out it would be the duty of 
the servants of the public not to receive any more in the 

You’ll admit the plan is very simple and not costly, but 
whether the powers that be have the courage to order it to 
be carried out, is another matter. Perhaps in deference to 
the dear professors, and the scholastic clique, it would be 
thought preferable to buy back more of the land from the 
adjoining ducal estate at an exorbitant price so as to enlarge 
the building ; this, doubtless, would be very agreeable to 
his grace, but decidedly against the monetary and intellec¬ 
tual interests of the public, and the principles of 



The Round World formed the heading of the Rector of 
Bressingham’s letter in The Rock, on April 19th of last year, 
in which number appeared a letter from my pen, with tie 



heading : Are Jesuits Outlaws in England? My letter was the 
beginning of the correspondence leading up to the libel case 
just concluded. 

I contend that I was correct in arguing that Jesuits are 
outlaws in England ; but was the Rev. W. C. Badger equally 
correct as a Church of England Protestant, if he took the 
Bible for his guide ? 

With some show of learning Mr. Badger challenges any 
Hebrew professor to contradict his “ round world ” reading 
of the Bible. He quotes Proverbs viii. 27 : “ When He pre¬ 
pared the heavens I was there, when He set a compass or 
the circle on the face of deep.” Dr. Taylor gives the meaning 
of Proverbs viii.27 thus: “He hath cast it into a circular 
form.” Job xxii. 14 : “He walketh in the circuit of heaven.” 
Isaiah xl. 22.: “ He sitteth upon the circle of the earth.” 

However far the Rector of Bressingham can “twist” the 
Hebrew in one or two passages to convey the idea of the 
earth being of a ball-like form, it is quite evident that the 
whole tenor of Scripture is opposed to the hypothesis of 
the Earth being globular in shape, and is dead against the 
fabulous foundation on which the Copernican temple of 
mysteries is reared. 

“Ninety-five millions of miles ! ” What does this distance 
represent? To represent the Sun and Earth on a uniform 
scale of one-sixteenth of an inch to 1,000 miles would require 
paper about 980 feet in diameter, with the Sun in the centre 
about 3-ft. 4-in. in diameter, and the Earth |-in. in diameter, 
travelling round the Sun about 490 feet distant. Picture 
the Earth on this small scale, with the Sun at a distance of 
490 feet direct above its centre ! What difference would 
there be in the direct rays of the sun if it was J-inch north 
or south of its direct centre line ? 

Leaving the suppositions of bookmen, and coming down 
to plain every-day common sense “ Is it possible to picture 
oneself travelling in a train 60 miles per hour and to fancy 
the tiain to be stationary? In the best equipped steamship 
can any passenger lose sight of the sensation occasioned by 
the steamer forging ahead ? ” Yet we are asked to deny the 
evidence of our senses, which asserts that the Earth is prac¬ 
tically stationary, though it is travelling 65,000 miles an 
hour through the air, making a journey of 1,560,000 miles 
in 24 hours, besides a daily “ turning over.” 



How the oceans could shoot through the air at this im¬ 
mense speed I could never comprehend, and, when a Bible 
student at College, I said to my tutor: “ If the Earth is a 
globular body, moving round the Sun at the terrific speed 
astronomers assert, then Joshua made a blunder when he 
commanded the Sun to stand still—for he should have com¬ 
manded the Earth to stand still ; but we are told that the 
shadow of the Sun went back io degrees.” My tutor told 
me I must not argue in this strain, and that I was to leave 
the class-room—which I did ; but I had to appear 1 on the 
carpet,” and a stop was put to the exercise of my “ private 
judgment,” the result being that for years I looked upon 
this phase of study as a subject outside of my comprehension, 
though I felt assured that if the globular theory is correct 
then the divinely inspired prophets didn t know v. hat the) 
were saying. 

I am informed that it is possible to investigate the distance 
of the Sun from the Earth by practical architectural measure¬ 
ment on the triangular principle, and three different latitudes 
are suggested (i) Cape Valetta, 2,153 miles north of the 
equator ; (2) Mount Carmel—where the prophets of Baal 
were confounded—1,9 7 1 rniles north of the equatoi , (3) 
Cape Town, 2,036 miles south of the equator. The experi¬ 
ment could be tried at each of these three places on the 
21 st of March or September—using a square (similar to a 
builder’s square) ; let one side of it be about 6 feet long, 
the other 5 feet ; the 6 feet side to be raised perpendicular 
at T 2 o’clock ; the shadow of the 6 feet would be about 4 
feet long (i.e., at 2,000 miles distant from the perpendicular 
position of the Sun). The difference in the distance of the 
Sun in the three places would not vary but a few miles. 

The practical proofs that the Sun is not 5,000 miles distant 
from the Earth would require a special article. 

Globular Theory advocates teach that the sea is convex 8 
inches to one mile. It must then (say some people) be 240 
inches (20 feet) in 30 miles, or else 4,000 miles rise would 
not be gained in 12,500 miles. 

The above paragraph is somewhat erroneous on the glob¬ 
ular hypothesis. As a matter of fact the sea must be similar 
to the following figures :—starting with 8 inches to the mile, 
in two miles there would be at least 20 inches rise , in five 
miles 4 feet rise ; in ten miles 20 feet ; in twenty miles 80 


< 1 7 

feet rise; in thirty miles 120 feet rise, not one way only 
Out every way. 

“ the earth and sea were a globe, where should we find 
the level horizon ? ” 

When a ship has disappeared to the naked eye, or below 
the horizon, as reported, if the investigator looks after it 
with a telescope he will behold it cutting its way through 
the waves ; but a misty day proves that the telescope will 
not penetrate water, which it must do if the roundness of 
the sea hides the ship from the vision of the beholder, when 
it appears to him as sinking below the horizon. The optical 
illusion arises from the sight being restricted to a certain 
distance, though the globular advocates inform the enquirer 
that the convexity in the distance of fifty miles is not sufficient 
to be discernible and, at the same time, they say a person 
cannot see a ship beyond 14 or 16 miles out to sea, because 
the sea’s roundness hides it from view. 

In lespect to certain passages in the Bible apparently 
favouring the globular hypothesis, I have learnt that some 
Hebrew and Greek terms may be “ twisted ” to mean almost 
anything. This was palpable to me when I was constructing 
a skeleton Greek Lexicon for the late Rev. Castle Cleary. 
In scoies of cases “ The Sabbath ” is falsely rendered “ The 
First Day of the Week.” 

But I have gone beyond the space allowed me for this 
article and I must conclude, at any rate for the present. 

611, Seven Sisters’ Road, XAVIER FIELD. 

Tottenham, London, N. 


One would think that the sad and terrible disaster in the 
West Indies, of last month (May), needed our deepest 
sympathy, and that none, however “ learned,” would have 
been so inhuman as to have made such a calamity an oc¬ 
casion for an ostentatious display of Phantasmal Science ; 
but such has been the case as the following “ Geological 
Section of the West Indies” plainly and irrefutably proves. 
If it is intended to prove the Earth a globe it is a miserable 

In the diagram, the volcano at the left-hand corner is 
Antigua, the'next Guadeloupe, next Dominica, next Mar¬ 
tinique, next St. Lucia, next St. Vincent. Barbadoes is 
between the last two in the distance, on the “water line. 

The “water line” looks very level, horizontal, straight, 
flat. Ah 1 perhaps this is the production of a telephoto¬ 
graphic lens and camera. If so, it has “ recorded in an 
'unmistakable manner ” that Mr. H. Yule’s so-called experi¬ 
ment on the Old Bedford Level was, to say the least, an 
“ optical delusion.” 

What have the members of the Glasgow British Association 
to say to this absolutely contradictory evidence ? 

But look where the globe has gone to ! Absolutely buried 
beneath the three elements—air, water, and fire ! And so 
the poor globe is buried at last beyond all recovery, and 
the “ flat earth ” and horizontal water line are on the top. 
Oh 1 but I see that is only the “ Earth’s Solid Core.” But 
tell us ye savants—if ye can ; yes, ij —why does your “ oust 
of the earth,” and the water resting on the earth’s crust, 
not partake of the contour of the solid core ? 

The core is surrounded with molten matter. 

Thank you. That’s very learned—very high—the pro¬ 
duction no doubt of a “ mighty intellect.” But as all heated 
bodies, whatever may be the source of their heat, cool down 
from the outside , how comes it about, in the name of common- 
sense, that your globe has got a "solid core”? Don’t 
you see that the molten matter is in the wrong place ? 



Now, don’t you think it is time you honestly and candidlv 
owned up to the truth, and publicly confessed that your 
science so-called is only the outcome of a vain imagination 
and that you have given the “ Scriptures of Truth ” the lie 
long enough ? 

Well, however that may be, this I know, for God has 
recorded it in His Unchangeable and Inflexibly Holy Word 
that EVERY idle word men speak they shall give an ac¬ 
count thereof in the Day of Judgment,—“ For by thy words 
thou shalt be justified or condemned.”— Matt. xii. 36 37 

So you see, gentlemen, the matter is not done with here 
but your teaching, whether true or false—and as it is anti- 
scriptural it is not true—will be ZETETICALLY INVESTI¬ 
GATED and you will receive a righteous reward for the 
things done in the body, whether they be good or bad 
(2 Cor. v. 10). B 

We heartily thank you for this unquestionable proof that 
the world is not a globe of land and water surrounded by 
“ the air we breathe,” which is surrounded by “ ether” which 
is surrounded by “ illimitable space.” 

It must be evident to the most simple reader that as the 
science of Modern Astronomy, by its doctrine of “ illimit¬ 
able space, does away with heaven it does away with God’s 
Ihrone (see Isa. lxvi. 1), and in consequence with God 
Himself; hence its origin is infidel and therefore Satanic. 


If Genesis is not to be relied upon, in its description of 
Creation, how shall we tiust Exodus ? If the Old Testament 
is not true, what will become of the New ? If the Creator 
through His servants, the prophets, has not correctly de¬ 
scribed His Works, how can we trust him for our salvation ? 
As the great Teacher, who came from God, himself declared : 
“ If ye believe not his (Moses) writings, how shall ye be¬ 
lieve my words ? ” They stand or fall together. Our Lord 
says so ; and every logical and candid mind must see it is 
so. We are prepared to accept the conclusion ; for we feel 
sure that no fact in nature is contrary to Bible teaching. 


First Ed. I he Earth not-a-globe Review. 




An Address by Lady Blount. 

Reprinted from the Wimbledon Gazette. 

This is one of the beautiful Psalms of David, and one 
which, according to the heading, he dedicated to the Chief 
Musician, probably to be set to music so that it might be 
sung in the service of the Temple. 

It begins with the contemplation of God’s creative works, 
and then leads on the mind to consider the moral law and 
righteousness. The consideration of this Psalm will well 
repay our earnest attention, and may we, while we consider 
it, be endued with the same spirit as the writer had when 
composing it. 

We are first invited to a consideration of 
the creation, 

and the Psalmist at once launches out into the midst of 
the subject with the simple yet magnificent declaration: 

“ The heavens declare the glory of God.” The Psalmist had 
in his early years led the life of a shepherd, and, as such, 

had watched the sun rise majestically over the eastern hills, 

culminating in the south, and finally setting in glorious 
effulgence in the west. By night, as he stood on the lull 
slopes, he had watched the stars come forth one by one, 
when the sun was setting, as though they were timidly pop¬ 
ping out to see if the light of day had fled. 

Thus we may perceive how God revealed Mis Works unto 
His servants of old, and instructed them according to His 
Will, and how He inspired them to leave us the books ol 
Nature and Revelation. 

The sweet Psalmist of Israel was taught of God—not only 
through inspiration, but even as we all may learn, through 
observation. And as he gazed up at the arched canopy of 
the heavens, constellation after constellation came forth and 
displayed itself—shining jewels in the purity of the eastern 
sky, until the whole heavens seemed to be ablaze with jew¬ 
elled splendour. Who could look on such a scene with an 
impassive eye ? Who could watch the marshalled hosts 


2 I 

come forth with unerring precision night after night and 
attribute their presence or their motions to chance, or what 
in the scientific jargon schools has been called “ the fortu 
itous concourse of atoms.” Who ever saw a fortuitous (or 
accidental, casual) concourse of atoms arrange themselves 
in order into any organized shape whatsoever? Nobody. 
No such infidel or unreasoning thoughts capped the mind 
of the 1 salmist. As he watched the heavens he sought for 
traces (or footsteps) of mechanism, design, and intelligence 
in tneir creation, and in the fulness of his heart he wor¬ 
shipped the power and intelligence which had made all these 

The heavens declare the 

hloky or con. 

There is a God, and no one can give a satisfactory ac¬ 
count of the universe by leaving out God. Yet the so-called 

scientists of the day try to explain the universe without 
God ! .No wonder then that they have gone astray, and 
have given accounts of the universe, its origin and formation, 
which I am free to say neither harmonize with the known 
facts of Nature nor agree with Bible teaching. But more 
of these discrepancies as we go on. 

“The heavens declare the glory.” The glory of God is 
seen in that vast superstructure above our heads which is 
called the firmament. According to the Word of God 
the firmament was made on the second day of Creation 
for the express purpose of supporting the waters which 
are above the firmament, and dividing them from the 
waters which are below the firmament. This is clearly stated 
in the first chapter of Genesis , verses six and seven, which 
read as follows “ And God said let there be a firmament 
in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from 
the waters. And God made the firmament,” which is de¬ 
scribed as “something stretched out and spread, like a 
cuitain, tent, or canopy,” and divided the waters which were 
above the firmament : and it was so.” Now let us take the 
Word of God before the word of man, and let us believe 
the Bible rather than what is called “ science.” And God 
Himself, speaking solemnly before His people Israel when 
He gave them His good Law, described the order of Cre- 

ation—heaven above, earth below, and water under the 
earth. It is written in Ex. xx. 4 : “ Thou shalt not make 
unto thyself any graven image, or the likeness ot anything 
that is in heaven above , or that is in the earth beneath , or 
that is in the water under the earth. 

It is befitting these perilous times to ponder upon this 
Commandment. It is imperative. And let us pray that we 
may not fall under the heinous sin of idolatry. Let us strive 
to shun it in every shape, form, or even semblance, for it 
appears to be a fearful and inexcusable sin in God’s sight. 
We are not only called upon to shun idolatry, not only to 
condemn it, but we should do our best to annihilate it ! 

It is written even respecting the evil habit of swearing, that 
if a man hear the voice of swearing, if he do not uttei it, 
then shall he bear his iniquity. And that iniquity is being 
a witness to evil of any kind, without putting the foot upon 
it and condemning it. Yet some think little of sweating 1 
Let us be warned against idolatry, as it is very strictly for¬ 
bidden by the Lord God Jehovah, the Creator of heaven 
and earth. 

If perchance the warning note had been raised when this 
evil first crept into the heart and centre of the Church of 
England, it might have been quenched. Let 11s flee also 
from idols within our hearts. 

To return to the subject:—“ Heaven above, earth beneath, 
and water under the earth.” The majority of human beings 
do not even affect to believe this. The Apostle saj s,^ If 
any man speak let him speak as the oracles of God. ^ It 
is not the business of the preacher to preach “ science to 
preach politics, to preach current topics of the day, but to 
“ preach the Word.” Hence I believe that if the heavens 
declare the glory of God, they must be those heavens which 
the Psalmist saw and believed in, and which led him to 
God, and not the heavens of modern astronomy and of 
“science falsely so-called.” The stars, according to Moses, 
were not made until the fourth day of Creation ; and then 
they are merely called “lights,” and lesser lights than the 
sun or the moon, made to give light upon the earth. And 
they do so. These lights, in silent solemnity and beauty, 
spoke their message to the shepherd of Israel as he watched 
nio-ht by night. And their teaching and influence were not 
confined to Judaea, for he says, “Their line [margin, ‘rule’] 


is gone out through all the earth.” As the Creator first 
intended them they are “ for signs and for seasons and for 
days and for years.” 

There is something very fascinating in the study of the 
stars, and eminent men in the Church, who have made them 
their study, have gone so far as to say that not only Cre¬ 
ation’s Story may be read in their “ voice,” but that the 
very story of Redemption itself may be traced by the signs, 
constellations, and ancient nomenclature. 

The Psalmist, meditating upon the beauty of the heavenly 
hosts, as he reclines, and watches them, upon the slopes of 
his native hills, sees the sun rise in majesty and splendour, 
and gives us his idea—probably under the inspiration of God! 
“ His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his 
circuit unto the ends of it : and there is nothing hid from 
the heat thereof.” This passage plainly proves that accord¬ 
ing to the Word of God it is the sun which moves round 
the earth and not the earth which moves about the sun. 
This agrees with observation and the facts of Nature. For 
no scientist has ever given the world a single proof that the 
earth moves—not one ! It is all assumption. But of these 
things I can give more proof if desired. After describing 
how the sun goes forth in his circuit, lighting up in turn 
every portion of the habitable earth, he rises to a higher 

He sees in the physical forces of the sun a symbol of 
the natural forces of God s Law. As there is nothing hidden 
from the sun, from some measure of its light and heat as it 
journeys round the world, so the Law of the Lord is all- 
embracing and covers all men’s actions and thoughts. God 
gave his Law on Sinai. It was written on two tables of 
stone, and it embraces all man’s duty to God, and, in the 
second place, all man s duty to his fellow man. There were 
ten Commandments , but one Law. And as the light and 
heat of the sun is penetrating, and necessary to the existence 
of mankind, so these ten Commandments were far-reaching, 
reaching everywhere to men's thoughts and actions, and as 
Paul says of the Word of God, “piercing even to the di¬ 
viding asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and 
marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the 
heart. “The Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the 

(to be continued , D.I r .) 



Mr Alexander M’Innes, Sauchiehall Street, Glasgow, 

- f v,r r rr me? 

He coached many hundred, of^peofessionaL gent emen n 
practising in Glasgow, England, and the Lolom . 
sons and six daughters mourn their loss. 

m rttemoriam. 

Alexander Ittclnnes, 

H Daliant Champion of the ftrutb, anb 
a Crue jfrienO, 

Died at 6la$gou), 3une t6tD, 1902, 

Ht 9.20 a.m., 

Bged 68 pears. 

<j„ sure a»> certain bopc of Eternal life. 

« I,-, Christ shall all be made alive” for aye, 

Thus said the Lord, through Paul and through Isaiah,- 
When death itself is slain, and prostrate . t ey. 

The dead, shall rise, redeemed through the Mes. < . 



“ Lift up your gates,” “ give way Sheol,” shall yet be said, 
And death, a vanquished foe, shall fall, for ever dead ! 
i Thess. iv. 13. 

The Angel Michael bore a message from the Lord, 

That Adam, though he die, shall live again ; 

For death shall yet be conquered by the Word— 

Its captives borne to Paradise, in train. 

Jesus—once slain—alone hath life, He lives 

To bring a deathless reign. Behold ! ’tis Life He gives. 


We are assured that every reader of The Earth will deeply 
sympathize with our dear and highly esteemed friend and 
contributor, Mrs. F. Horne, upon whom death’s cold hand 
has quite recently dealt a two-fold blow, and she now mourns 
the loss, not only of her much beloved brother, the most 
Rev. William Garden Cowie, D.D., Bishop of Auckland and 
Primate of New Zealand, but also that of her husband’s 

Mrs. Horne and her notable brother were born of parents 
who were distinguished for beauty of person, mental talents, 
and eminent lineage. The primate was born in Scotland, 
but the family removed in his early years to England, where 
he was educated. 

His father, dying at an early age, left his mother to bring 
up a large family, five of whom were sons, who all became 
distinguished men. This fact may have come to pass 
through the force of an uncommon combination of gentleness, 
strength, and energy which controlled the sway, and in¬ 
fluence of their wonderful mother—Mrs. Cowie. 

Bishop Cowie was born in 1831, and was educated at Eton 
and Trinity Hall, Cambridge, of which foundation he was a 
scholar. He won Latin and English essay prizes at his 
college, and in 1854 was placed second in the First Class 
of the old “ Civil Law Classes.” He remained for a short 
time in Cambridge, being admitted to Deacon’s Orders in 
1854, and licensed to the curacy of St. Clement’s, Cambridge. 


He was ordained priest in iS55i ar) d accepted the cuiacy of 
Moulton, Suffolk, his wife, whom he married in I 869, being 
a daughter of Dr. Webber of that place. In 1857 " as 

appointed a chaplain to the forces in India, and served with 
Lord Clyde’s army at the capture of Lucknow in 1858, for 
which he received a medal and clasp. He was present with 
the division under Sir Robert Walpole at the battles of 
Allygunge, Rooyah, and Bareilly. He joined the column of 
the late Sir Neville Chamberlain in the Afghan campaign of 
1863, being present at the storming of Lalloo by Sir John 
Garvock, and again receiving a medal and clasp. In 1863 
he was chaplain to the camp of the Viceroy of India, and in 
1864 he served Bishop Cotton, the Primate of India, as his 
resident and examining chaplain. In 1865 he was chaplain 
at Kashmir, where he interested himself actively in the Mis¬ 
sions of the Church Missionary Society. He then returned 
to England, and was then appointed by Bishop Lonsdale of 
Lichfield in 1867 to the rectory of Stafford. In that year 
Bishop G. A. Selwyn came home to attend the Lambeth 
Conference, and on the death of Bishop Lonsdale the see of 
Lichfield was pressed upon him. Bishop Selwyn returned 
for a short time to New Zealand to take farewell of the 
scene of his heroic labours, and Mr. Cowie was nominated as 
his successor in 1869. Since 1841, when the diocese of 
New Zealand was separated from Australia, Selwyn had borne 
the title of “ Bishop of New Zealand ; ” but in the interval 
six additional sees had been created, and Mr. Cowie now 
became the first Bishop of Auckland. 11 is career as a mili¬ 
tary chaplain and the active service he had seen had prepared 
him for the vigorous exertions required of him in New Zea¬ 
land, where for over thirty years he was an energetic Dio¬ 
cesan. Bishop Selwyn had secured something in the way 
of endowment for the bishopric, and the diocese was con¬ 
siderably assisted by the S.P.G. ; but owing to the presence 
within his borders of the workers of the C.M.S. among the 
Maories, the Bishop was also in frequent intercourse with 
Salisbury Square. Dr. Cowie was visitor and govern01 of 
St. John’s College, Auckland, and was appointed l'ellow of 
the University of New Zealand in 1880. He became I 1 i- 
mate of New Zealand in 1895, and he visited this counti \ 
in 1897 for the Diamond Jubilee and the last Lambeth 
Conference, receiving on that occasion the honorary degiee 



of D.D. from the University oi Oxford. He was the author 
of Notes on the Temples of Kashmir and of A Visit to 
Norfolk Island. 

We know not whether Dr. Cowie was in harmony with 
ourselves in his beliefs, regarding the Earth and other things, 
but that he was a beloved brother of such an earnest sup¬ 
porter of Truth, and so noble, clever, and dear personal 
friend as is Mrs. Horne, is sufficient to make his life account 
dear to us . And to all who love righteousness and mercy 
having learnt in Jesus’ Name to “ weep with them that weep,” 
there is a further reason for interest, viz. : our dear friend 
and helper in the work says, “ I could recount incidents in 
my brother’s life which would form stirring examples to 

Many columns could be written on the subject of the late 
Primate’s life, but as long reports have appeared in many 
well-known papers we will close this notice by quoting the 
words of Mr. Seddon, the Premier of New Zealand : * He 
w as one of my dearest friends. The last letter I had before 
leaving New Zealand was from him, asking me to see some 
of his friends in England, and to give his love to Lord 
Roberts. Everyone should read the remarkable interview in 
Roberts’ Forty Years in India, between the Commander-in- 
Chief and the late Primate of New Zealand before Candahar. 
He was a man of fine physique, and great influence alike 
with white men and Maories. He w r as an excellent organizer 
and ruled his diocese and province wisely. His loss to the 
Church of New Zealand will be a very great one.” 

Light is but darkness to the eye that's blind, 

And Wisdom’s folly to the vacant mind. 

Knowledge, if not with Truth conjoined and wedded, 
Sinks men in mire, and leaves them there embedded. 
The supernatural with its dazzling dower, 

Is not divine from every source and power ; 

Dor as in Pharaoh’s court—’tis now as then— 
Miraculous powers flow in evil men. 

But Light is Light if born of heaven’s pure ray, 

And W isdom Truth if born of heaven’s day. 


Knowledge of Good and Evil will increase ; 

The Good shall live, but Sin and Death shall cease : 

Then supernatural power Divine will reign, 

To bless the world through every source and vein. 

E. A. M. B. 


By Lady Blount. 

“ For what is your life ? it is even a vapour, that appeareth for a 
little time, and then vanisheth away .”—James iv. 14. 

Only a grain on Time's vast shore, 

A speck, or a particle, nothing more ! 
Then passing life's “span” or allotted 

Man returns once more to his mother 
clav ; 

In the evening, 

In the evening, 

In the evening of life’s day. 

Only a drop from the mighty tide, 
Where oceans,and seas, and gulfs divide; 
Toss’d for a moment on life’s girt shore. 
Tojoin the great deep as in days ofvore, 
In the evening, 

In the evening, 

Horne hack with the tide away. 

Only an atom here on earth, 

A mite,yet perchance of intrinsic worth; 
An animate being endowed with Mind, 
Unmeasured its power o’er a world 

In the evening, 
in the evening, 

From earth’s thraldom shall pass away 

Only a germ of knowledge keen, 

As “folly” and “madness” the million 
deem ! 

Shunned by the worldly are they who 

Through faith in the Christ believing 
Truth’s fire 

In the evening, 

In the evening. 

Shall burn with a brighter rav ! 

Only an inlluence sweet, a dream, 
From an occult source,or a spirit stream; 
A telephone link with a hidden land, 
Conjoining the seen with the unseen 
strand ; 

Till the evening, 

Till the evening, 

When the night shall have pass’d away. 
[“For there shall he no night there.”— 
Rev. xxi. 25; xxii. 5.] 

Only God’s Word in its unseen course, 
Rules Nature’s laws with miraculous 

Joy telling, grief quelling, borne down 
from above ! 

Eternal for ever ! Divine, sacred Love ! 
In the evening. 

In the evening. 

It shall reign with a perfect sway ! 

Only an utterance may waken a chord, 
Unsheath from its scabbard the 
assassin’s cold sword, 

Raise malice that’s dormant, and yet 

Till hatred more fearful if long deferr’d ; 
In the evening, 

In the evening. 

With vengeance shall have its play. 

Only a small voice, a pow’r untold, 
May shake an empire unbrib’d by gold ; 
Will shatter to atoms, and re-unite, 
And arouse the nations to see “ The 
Light! ” 

In the evening, 

In the evening. 

When the sun sets on mortal sway. 

Only a seedling, will raise a tree, 

Vet a germ everlasting it may he ; 

Only sweet knowledge, through Christ 
that’s true, 

Will survive—more lasting than oak or 

In the evening, 

In the evening, 

Of the great Resurrection Day. 
[“And at eventide it shall he light.”— xiv. 7.] 


Middletons attempted 
dimensions of the earth 


XL lhh chaH •»««"y 
eL'iL" s ” ua " mmpass wi,kk «*** /to 

T, ns dimension is much smaller than one would suppose. 



The latitudes are out as much as aO degrees on the 
China side, and countries thought tropical are really 
Arctic in consequence. 

This has been explained in - The Earth" Magazitte. 
for the months of March and May, 1903. 

The Great Secret of the Earth lies in the Gulf of 
Pichili , which is quite 30 degrees out of the Globe 
Latitude. Rivers in the Gulf of Pichili freez 
from November to March. 

This severity of climate upsets the Glo ff L F f ‘f 
and alloivs of a reasonable Ground Plan of the Eai // • 

The Longitudes arc fairly representative. 

1 e'.'e. MIDDLETON. 

God willing, we intend to publish regularly, 
as soon as possible, a Supplement to 1 "e 
Pnrth ” with each issue. It will aeai w»i 
TRUTH UNDIVIDED according to our belief, 
with a controversial column. 

Bv ‘'Rectangle." 

(continued front Vol. H., p. 1^5)- 

jss. s 


waters, yet as securely fixed as a ship in a Liverpool clock. 
The bases of the earth are so sunk as to make it immove¬ 
able for ever. Man is challenged to tell how. ‘ Upon what 
are its bases sunk ? ’— fob xxxviii. ‘He founded the earth 
on its bases; it is not moved for ever and ever.’— Ps. civ. 5. 
Now, why can an iron ship float, though that metal is seven 
times heavier than water ? Because, chiefly of the shape. 
But the heaviest rock is only three times the weight of water. 
Then consider the tremendous buoyancy of the ocean caus¬ 
ing some substances to float on the surface, and others to 
sink only to a certain depth. The earth, its density de¬ 
creasing from the foundation rock upwards to the soil of the 
surface, is sunk to a depth several miles in the sea, yet so as 
to have a dry surface, and shores on a level with the sur¬ 
rounding waters. It consists of four continents of an irreg¬ 
ular and somewhat triangular shape, stretching out from the 
central north, thousands of miles towards the icy barriers of 
the far south, against which winds and waves rage in vain. 
The continents are connected by sub-marine rocky beds, 
varying in depth, whilst the Arctic and Antarctic oceans 
are found to be unfathomable. 

“The flood, as we have seen, was caused by the opening 
of the netting of heaven and the fountains of the abyss. 
The heaven or sky ‘ is an expanse for the clouds, strong as 
molten mirror .’—fob xxxvii. 1 8 ; and was made on the second 
day of creation to separate the waters above from the waters 
below. ‘ Hast thou come to the springs of the sea?’ asks 
God—xxxviii. 16. It was formerly the opinion of Christian 
writers that these springs or fountains are in the central 
north, confined by the impenetrable walls of ice, which were 
broken down at the flood. However, when Noah had entered 
tire ark, from heaven and the abyss rushed the waters to ful¬ 
fil God’s purpose to destroy the earth with its inhabitants. 
Hence, the rending of rocks, the shattering of hills, the 
breaking up of the earth’s strata, the piling of mass upon 
mass, wherein were buried animals and plants to be dug up 
many centuries afterwards. All lands were filled with the 
•wreck of the old world—a terrible warning to all future ages 
against the commission of unrighteousness. 

“ And, let it be noted that the petrifaction of fossils is not 
surprising seeing that the earth was wholly sunk under the 
waters for a whole year. Even geologists confess that the 


degree of petrifaction is no P^°° f whiS the fossil has 

< The mere amount of cha ”^ ng a proof of the length of 
undergone, is not by any buried in the earth , as 

jM? a 

the beginning of God s fiam a . /Hebrew.) Where 

Z earth was in loose ^"l^olwiers; and God on 
weseth. loose atoms [J "consolidated all into rocks, strati- 
the third day of creati to ap pear. 

fied and unstratified, causin* * as a f oss il embedded among 
“ But, why is man not found a is not difficult, 

the rocks as are the animals . J as now. During 

Before the flood man was not ^ ^ I accor dmg to 

the 1656 years of the o t in tr from Adam to Noah, 

Moses, only ten generationsonly three sons. However, 

and Noah during 600 years ante deluvian population, 

let us reckon approximately the an^ 2 ; 2 nd 

allowing 8 children to each P generation, 128 , 5 th 

generation, S i ltd ; 7* 

generation, 5 12 - otn Q th generation, 1 3 ’ 

8,19*; 8th generation, 32 - 7 ^ 9 ^ t . and the 

10th generation, 524,-88, flooc [ migbt not amount 

whole human population befoi d b e it remembered 

to one-sixth of the population °, f , L ° ^' in Asiatic Turkey, 
that mankind in the old wor d dwelt > ^ ^ Noah 5 

speaking the same language, and t Qver the earth, took 
death that the dispersion from ’ t fifteen million 

olace. Asiatic Turkey contains B . d man be found, 

human beings, and there ontycou been geologically 

To what extent, if at all, has tnai 

examined.” (l0 b , continued D.V.) 

THE earth’s observatory. 

f cS 

All communications and enquiries respecting this Magazine and the teaching it 
upholds , and all questions and matter for insertion , should he addressed to 
E.A.M.B., //, Gloucester /load, Kingston Ilill. 


The Ed. does not necessarily endorse statements made tender the headings of • ‘ The 
Earth's ObservatoryLetters , etc., unless signed Ed. The Earth. 

“SIGNALS FROM MARS.—It will be remembered Unit a ye ,r or iwo ami 
great interest was aroused by tbe announcement that Mars was mating signals 
to the earth. The idea seized hold of the popular imagination, and writers of 
fiction began to introduce the inhabitants of other planets into their romances. 
The astronomers, however, with the exception of those who had observed the 
so-called signals, were rather sceptical about the whole thing. Even in the 
very biggest telescopes Mars is by no means a large object, and signals from 
it would have to be on a tremendous scale in order to be observed on tbe earth. 
It is now announced that what w as taken for a signal was merely a cloud passing 
rapidly over a part of the phnet’s surface which is believed to be an immense 
tract of vegetation. We shall thus have to wait a little longer for authentic 
messages from Mars. 5 ’— People's Friend , May 26, 1902, Dundee, Scotland. 


In answer to F. TO. W., regarding “degrees,” we believe personally that the 
continents and islands of the Earth are situated “upon the seas” and at"distances 
relaiively as generally described (Ps. xxiv. 1-2).—[Ed.] 

The Equator may form a smaller circle. 

The lower mere sectarianism is sunk, the higher Charity, or true Christian 
Love will rise. 

A FAMOUS PENDULUM.—The French Government has decided to inslal 
at the Pantheon, Paris, the famous pendulum by which Foucault in 1 So7 de¬ 
monstrated the rotation of the earth. 

The Government of Paris once decided to measure, in a manner, a quadrant, 
or half the meridian from pole to pole, for the purpose of obtaining their 
standard of measuring the metre, lint they found afterwards they were wrong. 
Vet they slick to the metre. They may stick to Foucault’s pendulum, but 
neither lie nor they have proved the rotation of the earth by it. I note the 
paragraph in the paper is followed by the heading “ Scottish Bulls;” the editor 
might have put a similar heading to the paragraph quoted, viz. : French Bulls! 

“ It often happens that the universal belief of one age of mankind—a belief 
from which no one was, nor without an extraordinary effort of genius and 
courage, could aL that lime be free—becomes to a subsequent age so palpable 
an absurdity, that the only difficulty then is to imagine how su :h a thing can 
ever have appeared credible.”—JOHN STUART MILL. 

24 THE earth’s observatory. 

NTOM DF PI UMES -We quite agree with Mr. Middleton on this point 
This is the case zvith some of our contributors. .J 

SUNSPOTS AND ASTRONOMY : A Locai. Student’s Contentions. 

out to Sir Norman Lockyer that as a matter of scientific ° „f n e lv 

neighbourhood of Sydney, in the southern hemisphere ^hrch^ould 
lively appear to destroy the legendary dimensions of cele*tial sun i^ ^ 
We have recently finished our own personal studs of ' x , , 

heavens.. And we can therefore point out to Sir Norman Lockye ( 1 ) that the 

sun’s diameter is not more than two hundred and ten , “j , ve iocitv 

above the earth does not exceed one thousand miles (8 that theMal> ehocU> 
of the sun does not exceed five hundred miles an hour (4) anfl ' las “-’ , 
die daily orbital circumference of the sun’s path >n the heavens is 1 muted to 
twelve thousand geographical miles. ^ DAVIDSON. 

“ The Earth, a monthly magazine of sense and science edited 
will he found interesting. It is the organ of the Un fl^rhe Invh}, 
and is published with the object of proving that the earth is fiat. J 

World, June 13, 11102. 

“On Sunday last, June «th, the Free Proteziani Church 

Thanksgiving'Service for the cessation of war and the esta hshment^ot^ ^ 

between the Boers and the Britons, at Christ Church, P^hha ^ we) , 

Rev. J. McMillan is the much'respected incumbent. The ep. P w of 

represented by Bishops Marlin and McLaglen, and Archbishop Stme - 

whom, with the Incumbent, took part m the service. T McMillan and 

music on the occasion by Mrs. Martin, Misses Martin 

others, whose names we were not fortunate enough to g , g ( 

choir, accompanied by an able organist. The church looked very bngj* 
cheerful, and the attendance was good, some coming from a - • the ’ a(1 _ 

the rain and cold and general uncertainty of the weather Afte . B ^ 
dresses the jubilant livmns, and inspiring anthems had been given, 

National Anthem sung, the’service was closed by the Aicbh^p giving the 
Benediction. In the afternoon preceding the Thanksgiving Service „ 

lecture was given by Lady Blount, the subject being Biblical Cosmog ., 


“ --- r. H~~ 

the Right Rev J. Martin, D.D., in the chair. The discussion was sustained 
by Dr. Haughton P.Dr., the Most Rev. Dr. Stevens, Abp. and Pat an 
several others including a minister of the Established Church, whose name we 
were unable to catch. It was stated to be the best attended meeting of the 
season. Much interest being evinced, the meeting was considerably extended 
,n time, and reluctantly closed. ’-/*//,,^™ Daily Express, &V. June 1MW 

[Personally we think warfare is wrong. — Ed. 1 

r ' A NOUAGE. —In Herbert Spencer’s Eirst Principles will be found a defini¬ 
tion of Evolution, thus :—“ Evolution is a change from an indefinite incoherent 
homogeneity, to a coherent heretogeneity, through continuous differentiations 
and "itegrattons. This appears to he a super-eminent method of obscuration 

iy nguage for the obfuscation of the whimsical nonsensicality of so-called 

lefinhio i'ihu C,enC “ M , r \ Ki<k,,,an 1 haS *?'>’ lranslal -> abo^ Spencerian 
all a likeness I nT c L '°‘f ,ona C'ange from a no-how-ish untalkaboiitable 
all ahkeness, to a some-how-ish and m-general-talkahoutahle not-all-alikeness 
through continuous something-else-ifications.” So evolutionists can now make 
a choice. That they find satisfaction and have joy in either is very doubtful to 


The following cutting is taken from The Express, ami indicates a kind of 
nervoti, apprehension that there nuy be a doubt after all in their conclusions. 

“ Phe Paris public are displaying great curiosity over the Foucault pendulum 
which is to he shown next week at the Pantheon. The two eminent Scientists’ 

“VfT an( * C i a u ill . e tlammarion > are now conducting experiments with 
the pendulum, whicn by its movements proves the rotation of the earth The 
pendulum is a ball of lead weighing 561bs., and the wire to which it is attached 
is a specially made fine piano string, just short of 210ft. in length—the longest 
piano wire ever drawn The oscillation lasts eight seconds in either direction 
sixteen seconds in all -and the pendulum apparently displaces itself in the op¬ 
posite direction to the movement of the earth’s rotation. The pendulum affords 
the most magnificent lesson in astronomy that has ever been given to the public.” 

1 ihZlI! S ,i 0, “ elha ' tlleSeSCie ", li f C experimenters proclaim rather too much 
l ,his M uesllon was settled, at least our school books tell us so. After 

d e Eiffe T,uve y fr f T “ V «PParenll V .” Why don’t they hang one from 
the Li Mel lovvei, if it is length of swing tliev require ? It is quite time these 

the sam»T" ‘° ? onclusion ! ‘heir minds seem to Iwing about in 

uncerbdnt -F n'' 87 “ pendulunl > resultin S i<> 'he same delightful 


To the Ed. of The Earth -from A SEA CAPTAIN. Melbourne, 

I tried to get the length of cable from Penh to Adelaide from the Telegraph 
Mas er at Albany. The Telegraph Handbook was not out for the veaf- he 
‘ not sue 11 m l,u! -tdviscd me to write to the Manager of the Cable Com- 


p;iny Perth, which I did, and enclosed a stamp, but have received no reply yet ; 
that Is a month ago. If they intended to give the inhumation asked I would 
have received it before this. I received all The Earths which you sent me, 
and I found them very interesting. I have no doubt the degs. of long, are 
shorter as you go South from the Equator; for instance : from Cape Otway, in 
Lut. 38 deg. 55 m. 8 s., Long. 143 deg. 30 min. E., to Breahsea Island near 
Albany, West Australia, Lat. 35 deg. 0 m. 5 s., Long. 118 cleg. 3 m. East, the 
course and direction by Mercator is N 85 deg. E., distance 1212 miles, which 
has proved without a doubt if the degrees of Long.were say (10 miles to a degree, 
which means 1527 miles against 1227 miles—the degree being 4,-9 miles by 
Nones’ Epitome—ships would be doing a greater speed than they do, and which 
would surely have been noticed before this. 1 read that article in The Earth— 
“ Nithsdale”—proving the degrees of longitude were not the same as laid down, 
and the way the Admiralty charLs are drawn account for a lot of ship wrecks 
which I do not think is true. If you have an up-to-date chart of a place, and 
a good chronometer you can make the land in clear weather to an hour. I have 
had the misfortune to lose my ship three weeks back on the coast o( W.A., 
which is indifferently surveyed, and was exonerated by the Marine Board. 

7, Waring Street, Belfast. Jan. 28, 1902. 

To the Editor of The Earth.— i am a great admirer of your spirited Magazine, 
The Earth as well as a subscriber, and if you think the enclosed worthy or a 
place in your publication, 1 shall thank you ; it is but another proof (if one were 
wanted) that the Earth is not a globe. 

If a perpendicular he lot fall from A as produced it will pass limngli he 
centre. If another perpendicular he let fall from B, it also will pass through 
the centre : both perpendiculars will meet at C. These lines therefore are not 

the• earth's' observatory. 

If a house, or a continuation of houses he erected, no matter what the distance, 
the two end walls or gables will not he parallel. The same effect follows in 
a single house—the walls are not parallel. Tell an architect that his walls are 
not parallel—I do not know what he might do, hut I know what he would say. 
The tiricklayer puts up his walls plumb (perpendicular)-—no doubt about this—- 
and if plumb on a'circle or globe, the walls cannot be parallel. But, as a 
matter of fact, the walls are parallel, therefore the Earth is not a ylobe. (I’roof 

N». 191). C. W. ASHER, G.E. 

• (A College, Arneway Street, Horsefenv Road, S.W. 1 

To the Ed. of The Earth. —You may he interested to hear. 1 addressed a 
letter to Nature on the subject of the tides. My letter was promptly returned 
with the Editor’s compliments and regrets that lack of space, &c. As I con¬ 
sidered my letter deserved better treatment I despatched it to Lord Kelvin for 
his opinion thereon. His lordship has returned me no reply, not even.sending 
me hack my letter to Nature, for which I enclosed a stamped envelope. Now 
1 argue that had I been wrong in my contention it would have been an easy 
method for Lord Kelvin to have said so, and retained a character for kind 
courtesy. But what is to he said of his silence? As my contention is simple, 
I enclose an account of the points of my attack, which you can use if you think 
proper. I will not trouble about the rising of the tide on the side of the earth 
away from the moon—the current theory for which strikes me as utterly im¬ 
possible. But let A represent the earth and B 
the moon. Then there is said to lie the.force. - 
of gravitation to the earth’s cen re and gravita¬ 
tion to the moon’s centre. These two forces 
oppose one another, anjl bv consequence the 
water at C is said to he* subject to these two 
forces. The earth’s gravitation must have more 
power on the Water for these reasons,:. (1) 'its 
greater size ; '(.2j its greater density : (3) its con¬ 
tiguity to the water, whereas the moon’s in¬ 
fluence has t « operate through hundreds of thousands of miles ; the moon, there¬ 
fore has no (tower at all to lift a ridge of water at C. In concluding this letter 
1 wish to express ntv best wishes for your welfare, ami that you mav he always, 
guided by the Lord God. Yours sincerely. JOHN HILL. 

For our unbiased opinion of .Korcshanity kindly see 
A Glimpse at Korcshanity, by Lady Blount, in The Earth 
■ —No.s 6 and 7, p 8*—and Cellular Cosmogony, by the late 
William Bathgate of .Liverpool, in The Earth —No.s 8 and 
9 . and. 10 and 11, p. 81, 119, and 149.. 




We have much pleasiue in recommending the above work. 

The booklet contains the three thousand words, and idioms, 
which are most used in ordinary conversation ; sufficient to 
enable you to talk French all your life ; no fossil philological 
peculiarities, but French as it is actually spoken in I'ranee. 
Grammar underlies each group of examples, and we think 
this a cleverly condensed method of teaching the I'rench 


The Author of French in Three .!/ out its also gives I.essons 
in Conversational French to adults, at 




Friends of the lid. of this Magazine can testify to his ability 
and agreeable way of teaching. 

Bryn Aber College and Home School 


Bryn Aber, Sea Road, Boscombe. 

Miss CORDON (of many years’ practical experience in tuition) receives a 
.imited numIter of voting ladies'to hoard and educate. The situation other house 
is healthv and pleasant, being only i minutes’ walk from the sea. well sheltered 
bv iiiiies'; with perfect sanitation, warm and comfortable carpeted bed and cl; ss 
rooms. Special facilities for acquiring languages, the best foreign governesses 
residing in the house, and French and German being constantly spoken. 

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co., 


27, Great Eastern House, 

Price of Appliances £1 Is., £2 2s., & £3 3s 

Instalments may be arranged. 


VOL. IQ-_Nos. 27 & 28 . 


Sitting on The Flat Earth ! 

My pamphlet on the northern Midnight Sun having been 
circulated in Australia, a medical gentleman sent a copy to 
the local astronomer for his “ scientific ” opinion thereon. 
I give his letter and the astronomer’s reply just as they are 
written. Bad health has prevented me attending to this 
matter earlier, except so far as to answer the letter of the 
medical correspondent, and send him further literature. 

375 , Newcastle Street, 

Perth, Western Australia. 

*7 / * / 


Dear Sir, 

A short time ago 1 came across the enclosed 
brochure, referring to a vvellknown subject—the true 
shape of the Earth. 

Knowing nothing of the scientific aspects of the 
question I forwarded the paper to the Government 
Astronomer of this Colony. 

His reply I also enclose. 

Yours truly, 

Albert Smith, Esq. J. A. LANGDON. 


Ohs. No. (.j 1’roni the Government Astronomer, 


Aiting Medical Officer, Katanning, 

Dear Sir, 

I know there are still a few persons who profess to believe that 
the Earth is a plane and stationary, whilst the sun revolves round it, 
but I did not know that any of them had printed such utter rubbish 
as in the pamphlet you so kindly sent me. This is the first of their 
publications I have seen and I am much obliged to you for it. I 
suppose some of them have written something a trifle more plausible 
than The Midnight Sun , and it would interest me to see a really 
plausible explanation of their tl eory. As to The Midnight Sun, 
the author has not the slightest idea of modern theories, etc., e g. : in 
liis diagram on page 7. As a fact the sun at its farthest north de- 




We have much pleasiue in recommending the above work. 

The booklet contains the three thousand words, and idioms, 
which are most used in ordinary conversation ; sufficient to 
enable you to talk French all your life ; no fossil philological 
peculiarities, but French as it is actually spoken in I'ranee. 
Grammar underlies each group of examples, and we think 
this a cleverly condensed method of teaching the I'rench 


The Author of French in Three .!/ out its also gives I.essons 
in Conversational French to adults, at 




Friends of the lid. of this Magazine can testify to his ability 
and agreeable way of teaching. 

Bryn Aber College and Home School 


Bryn Aber, Sea Road, Boscombe. 

Miss CORDON (of many years’ practical experience in tuition) receives a 
.imited numIter of voting ladies'to hoard and educate. The situation other house 
is healthv and pleasant, being only i minutes’ walk from the sea. well sheltered 
bv iiiiies'; with perfect sanitation, warm and comfortable carpeted bed and cl; ss 
rooms. Special facilities for acquiring languages, the best foreign governesses 
residing in the house, and French and German being constantly spoken. 

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co., 


27, Great Eastern House, 

Price of Appliances £1 Is., £2 2s., & £3 3s 

Instalments may be arranged. 


VOL. IQ-_Nos. 27 & 28 . 


Sitting on The Flat Earth ! 

My pamphlet on the northern Midnight Sun having been 
circulated in Australia, a medical gentleman sent a copy to 
the local astronomer for his “ scientific ” opinion thereon. 
I give his letter and the astronomer’s reply just as they are 
written. Bad health has prevented me attending to this 
matter earlier, except so far as to answer the letter of the 
medical correspondent, and send him further literature. 

375 , Newcastle Street, 

Perth, Western Australia. 

*7 / * / 


Dear Sir, 

A short time ago 1 came across the enclosed 
brochure, referring to a vvellknown subject—the true 
shape of the Earth. 

Knowing nothing of the scientific aspects of the 
question I forwarded the paper to the Government 
Astronomer of this Colony. 

His reply I also enclose. 

Yours truly, 

Albert Smith, Esq. J. A. LANGDON. 


Ohs. No. (.j 1’roni the Government Astronomer, 


Aiting Medical Officer, Katanning, 

Dear Sir, 

I know there are still a few persons who profess to believe that 
the Earth is a plane and stationary, whilst the sun revolves round it, 
but I did not know that any of them had printed such utter rubbish 
as in the pamphlet you so kindly sent me. This is the first of their 
publications I have seen and I am much obliged to you for it. I 
suppose some of them have written something a trifle more plausible 
than The Midnight Sun , and it would interest me to see a really 
plausible explanation of their tl eory. As to The Midnight Sun, 
the author has not the slightest idea of modern theories, etc., e g. : in 
liis diagram on page 7. As a fact the sun at its farthest north de- 


clinatioii, passes overhead at the tropic of Cancer, and according 
to accepted theory “ overhead ” means a contination of a line 
joining the observing station with the Earth’s centre. The position 
of the sun therefore should be on a prolongation of E F and at an 
enormous distance away. Placed thus, what becomes of the difficulty 
of seeing it from M, in a direction somewhat resembling M Q ? 

As to the theory of the sun’s rays just reaching through our atmosphere 
to a certain distance, it is too funny for words. An action of this 
kind must be gradual and must vary with the constitution of our 
atmosphere, if we are to accept any verified facts of optics whatever. 
In this case the length of each day will be determined by the state 
of the atmosphere ! Besides apply the simplest mathematics to the 
case. On page f) : suppose the sun is running round the inner circle 
O R Q. See how his motion would appear to an observer at G. 
With centre G and radius G N draw a circle cutting O R Q in X and 
V. Then when the sun reaches X it would be just rising to the 
observer at G, when at R it would be noon, and sunset at Y. But in 
one hour’s motion from X its apparent angular movement at G would 
he almost nil and this would gradually increase until it would reach 
a maximum at noon and then decrease. Now nothing is so certain 
as that the sun moves through equal angles in equal times, so this 
consideration alone would absolutely demolish the theory. 


1 need not go on, but what about the stars ? 1 honestly believe that 

many who profess to believe (!) in this nonsense do not even know 
that every star in the sky describes a circle round the celestial pole 
every 24h. Ask some of them for fun, if you come across any. 

The fact is that the writer of the book on Norway could easily 
have worked ovit all his sta ements of facts in his study, and if he 
used the ordinary theories they would be as correct as if he observed 
them, and probably more so, because the small error of observation 
would be eliminated, e.g. % the 4th par. on page 3, “ the nearer any 
point,” etc., evidently has been u'ritten in this manner, for the ob¬ 
server has not certainly visited the Pole or has remained remarkably 
reticent about it. 

One more word. I believe the confusion of the term “ level ” with 
“straight” or “plane” has given rise to no end of error. The sea 
is, on the whole, level but certainly not plane. The level of anything 
is measured by an instrument which depends upon the action of grav¬ 
ity and when we state that two points are on the same level we mean 
that they are subjected to the same gravitational pull, or in other 
words are equi-distant from the Earth’s centre. This, however, 
would be above the level of these paradoxers. * 

Yours faithfully, 





It will be seen from the above letter that our astronomical 
critic speaks down to us from the lofty pedestal of superior 
“ scientific ” knowledge. fie acknowledges that he was 
ignorant of Plane Earth literature ; and so he was grateful 
to our medical friend for the “rubbish” he sent him. It 
amused him. He was not aware that we printed “ rubbish,” 
or anything else. But sometimes we do print rubbish, as 
witness his letter, that we may show it up and shoot it on 
to its proper heap. We look through it first to see ii we 
can find a lost gem or two, or anything valuable. Even 
an ignorant Zetetic can pick up little trifles ol value when 
he sees them, and there are trilles here quite as valuable as 
the little bits of broken pottery from the kitchen middens 
of Babylon, which the soi-disant “higher critics” prize 
so much. For instance he savs that the writer ol the 
Midnight Sun “ has not the slightest idea of modern 
theories.” Then astrononomical doctrines arc mere “theo¬ 
ries ” after all ; and “ modern ” too ! Good ! Pick up these 
trifles, friends ! 

W e are then treated to a specimen of these modern 
theories, “ Overhead,” says this gov ernment official, “means 
a continuation of a line joining the observing station with 
the Earth’s centre?” The theory evidently docs violence to 
our senses when we have to be told what overhead “means. 
So that taking four spectators. A, B, C, and D, each 90 de¬ 
grees apart, and all looking away from the centre ol the 
supposed “globe” ; if A is looking upwards towards a star, 
surely C, who is looking in an opposite direction must be 
looking downwards to see his star ; while B and D are looking 
sideways in equally opposite directions. 






A theory which confuses the plain terms, up and down, 
and contradicts the instincts and senses of mankind, is 
discredited in the very fact. The mischief is magnified w'hen 
we remember that such teaching nullifies the doctrine of the 
the Saviour of the World who taught us that heaven is every¬ 
where “ above ” the Earth. 

Zetetics are not going to give up their belief in the Bible 
Heaven, or in the infallibility of the Great Teacher who 
“came down from heaven,” for the sake of a mere “ modern 
theory.” It will be time enough to do so when the astro¬ 
nomers can prove the bottom line of this page is the top, 
or vice versa ; and that the roof of a house is the same as 
the foundation, or the floor ! Or, that when it rains in 
Australia the rain-drops fall upwards in relation to us ! 

Next, referring to my first diagram, which we reproduce 
to make his meaning clearer, our astronomer says : “ the 
sun therefore should be on a prolongation of E F, and at an 
enormous distance." (Italics mine.) 

Notice his assumptions. Why that “ therefore ” ? Because 
of his “overhead” theory. If w'e are to allow every astro¬ 
nomical “ theory ” we might as well give in to the globular 
theory at once. He has given no reason for his “overhead ” 




theory which might as well be described as underhead / 
Neither has he given any proof of his “ enormous distance. 

We have given proof that the sun is less, considerably 
less, than three thousand miles away. But he has not read 
Zetetic literature, and so he trots out his ridiculous 
“theories” with an air of innocent superiority ! 

It is a specimen of modern “scientific” reasoning. Our 
critic may be a good astronomer, as modern astronomers 
go, but he is evidently lacking in the logical faculty. As 
correct reasoning is not taught by mathematics, which ma\ 
be applied to any fallacy, I beg to recommend him a severe 
course of study in Euclid. He would then learn better how 
and where to place his “ therefores,” and attempt some proof 
in the place of hypothetical and unfounded speculations. 

We should like to see something “ a trifle more plausible. 
(to be continued). 



On Tuesday evening, July I st, a lecture on “ lhe Plane 
Earth Truth” was delivered at Craftsman’s Club, Birming¬ 
ham. There were not many present to hear my discourse. 
This was probably owing to to my having postponed the 
meeting, to attend one which it was impossible to put ofl, 
viz. : a meeting of “The Midland Phrenological Students 
Society,” of which 1 am Vice-President. 

Great interest was manifest throughout my address. 1 
explained briefly the common belief as to the Earth being 
a “ globe ’’ turning on its imaginary axis from V est to East, 
with the inevitable consequences of everything being peri¬ 
odically turned upside down. 

One man said if we got too near the edge we might fall 
off the Earth. This greatly amused the chairman and 
caused much laughter. 

1 then briefly explained the beliefs of pianists which are 
based (1st) upon the statements as set forth in the Scriptures, 
and (2nd) upon the evidence of their senses, and practical 
investigation. After dwelling for some time on the undeni- 




able fact that water is level , and the sun’s motions (which 
we may all behold) I exhibited a map of the Earth as an 
outstretched plane, published by the late D. Ward law Scott. 

Questions were asked about gravitation, and if there was 
no such law why bodies fell to the earth ? I suddenly dropped 
a piece of paper, and asked them why it fell to the floor ? 
No replj’. I repeated my question, “Why did it fall?” 
They said it was because of “ gravity.” But one said, “ that 
means weight. Where is the weight ? ” (Laughter.) Another 
said, “ Oh, there are forces in nature of which we are at 
present unaware.” They could not define “gravitation,” 
and were in a greater fix when I asked them why a balloon 
rose in the air ? “ Had ‘ gravitation ’ lost its power over a 

little bit of earth, silk, rope, &c.” One gentleman said it 
was because certain gases had a law peculiar to themselves, 
and the gas in the balloon was one of them. Then I asked, 
“Has one gas the power of robbing ‘gravitation’ of its 
force ? ” Next I told them “ the reason why the paper fell 
is because it is heavier than the air, and the reason a 
balloon rises, is because it is lighter, and when it has risen 
to the height of its own density there it remains until it is 
relieved of weight or ballast, or the gas is loosed out of the 
bag. The company being satisfied with this explanation 
the meeting was reluctantly brought to a close, and I received 
a cordial vote of thanks for my “ entertaining address : ” the 
President remarking that “ it seemed that we had accepted 
much on this subject, from boyhood, without questioning 
its truth, and that there was much food for thought in the 
teaching of a plane and motionless earth.” 



Mr. John Hill’s notice of the Moon and Tides, in the last 
number of The Earth , is a reminder that on several occasions 
I, with others, have carefully watched the Thames, while in 
full flood, at Richmond, observing that the volume of water 
was composed of two distinct strata. The lower tidal, or bed 



stratum, of about two feet deep was somewhat cloudy and 
carried a large amount of detritus, and was rapidly flowing 
towards Teddington, while the clear upper stratum, of many 
feet deep, was flowing strongly towards Isleworth and 

From the theoretical astronomical side evidently the moon 
was ignoring the upper stratum of water entirely, and de¬ 
voting (?) all its influence on the lower one on these occa¬ 
sions ; but as the luminary has no apparent effect on water 
in mid ocean, land-locked lakes, ponds, or even small pud¬ 
dles, this need not cause much wonderment. 

Intelligent people think, if the moon causes all (?) the 
astronomers say it does regarding the tides, these peculiar¬ 
ities could not exist. The fact is the astronomers know 
very little more of the celestial luminaries and their influences 
than the man in the street, although professing to talk very 
learnedly (?) about them. 

Parallax, in his work Zetetic Astronomy , advanced a more 
sensible and feasible cause for the tides than all the theor¬ 
etical astronomers and so-called scientists have been able 
to do up to the present. 

As to "Nature's" and Lord Kelvin’s treatment of Mr. John 
Mill’s letter, that is no more than was to be expected from 
such sham oracles, as no doubt they saw the drift of the 
questioning, which would only hold them up to ridicule had 
they dared to be involved. They would give the errs oft 
their heads could they produce only one solitary proof of the 
globularity of the world ; they know it cannot be done but 
are too cowardly to own it. \\ hat an exhibition of British 
learned (?) pluck ! 



After an outlay of .£23,000, on July 9th, 1902, The Morn¬ 
ing\ a vessel of 437 tons, sailed from the Ifast India Docks 
for Lyttleton, N.Z., thence for the extreme Antarctic about 
Cape Adare, etc., presumably to relieve, if necessary, they 
crew of the Discovery , which sailed in 1901 for those terrible 



All must wish The Morning success, whether the work 
amounts to relieving or exploring on her own account ; at 
the same time Zetetics, of all people, hope that Capt. Scott 
has been carefully studying our Plane World Map and 
literature, which he has on board, thereby obtaining a more 
correct idea of his bearings, than he could otherwise have 
done. As to the German, Swedish, or Scotch Antarctic 
Expeditionary parties coming into contact (as presumed by 
some) with the Discovery party, the chances are very re¬ 
mote, as a glance at our map for the different points of 
attack, will convince anyone who knows anything of the true 
shape of The World and the climatic conditions of the 
southern regions. 

The points alluded to are South Victoria Land, Enderby 
Land, and Graham Land. It will be at once seen that the 
above bases of attack are thousands of miles apart, so that 
the idea of the land expeditionary parties meeting are so 
remote that it is not worth entertaining. Capt. Scott of the 
Discovery at any rate will be answerable if he jeopardizes 
rashly any part of his crew in the fruitless attempt, he having 
been warned. 

If the explorers generally, really think they are working 
towards a central point on a globular body, the prime movers 
oi the expeditions in these islands know such is not the case, 
the U.Z.S. having, for the last forty years or more, been 
hammering away at them to settle the question once for 
all by demonstration. They are perfectly aware that the 
World is not a globe, but have not the courage to admit it. 
The true mileage by a circumnavigation at about 60 degrees 
South would conclusively prove our position as right, and 
the falsity of the Newtonian theory ; the inner 'cult know 
this, yet they allow brave men to risk their lives in attempt¬ 
ing to reach a mythical central southern magnetic or other 
non-existent point called a pole. 

The World not being a globe revolving in space, or any¬ 
thing else, a central southern point is nothing but a baseless 
assumption, not worthy to be held by any intelligent human 

The Morning expects to reach Lyttleton in November, 
where she will re-fit and re-store, and leave for Cape Adare, 
whence she will as far as practicable follow in the steps of 
Capt Scott to Possession Island, Coulman Island, Wood 

4 6 


Bay, Franklancl Island, and Cape Crozicr—leaving at each 
place stores and picking up such news as Capt. Scott may 
have left at each place concerning his progress. 

Eastward of the 164th west meridian the Morning is for¬ 
bidden to go, even though it has good reason to suppose 
that the Discovery has entered that region of silence and 
night. It will return to Lyttelton to await further news of 
Capt. Scott. This, in short, is the programme. The relief 
ship itself is said to be the strongest ice-ship ever built in 
Norway. It will be commanded by Capt. William Colbeck, 
Mr. R. England being chief officer, Mr. E. Evans second, 
Mr G. Doorby third, and Mr. George Mulock fourth officei. 




By Scribo. 

“ Lady Blount will address a meeting to be held at Com¬ 
merce House, Wood Green, on Sunday evening, Aug. 10.” 

“ Scribo ” needed no second invitation to be present, 
seeing that he had been desirous of hearing her ladyship 
discourse upon the Earth, and other cognate questions, for 
some time past. 

Arri\ ing at the foot of Jolly Butchers Hill—known by 
local religious and irreligious debaters as the “ Areopagus 
of Wood Green,” (for there, as in old time on Mars Hill, 
the people meet to discuss new doctrines)—I quickly passed 
over the knoll and came to the corner of Commerce Road, 
the place of meeting. _ ^ 

The audience were mostly members of the Sabbath Union 
Society, at whose invitation Lady Blount—who is President 
of one section of the Union—was giving the lecture. 

There was a short service, consisting of prayer, singing, 
and reading a portion of God’s Word, conducted by Messis. 
Brown and Nicholls ; her ladyship being introduced by Mr. 
Brown with a few appropriate remarks. 



Lady Blount —having expressed her pleasure at being 
present—at once desired it to be understood that she relied 
upon the Bible and what was taught therein, That she took 
as her “ rule of faith,” and regarded it to be as immovable 
as the foundations of the Earth, for “ the pillars of the earth 
are the Lord’s, and He hath set the world upon them.” 
(r Sam. ii. 8). “ He hath founded the earth upon her bases 

that it should not be removed for ever.” (Ps. civ. 5). “ He 

hath founded it upon the seas, and established it upon the 
floods.” (Ps. xxiv. 2). Also we read in Ps. cxxxvi., God 

“stretched out the earth above the waters.made great 

lights [i not worlds ], the sun to rule by day.the moon and 

stars to rule by night.” 

In the writings of Moses and the Prophets these truths 
are set forth, but “ if they hear not Moses and the prophets 
neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the 
dead : ” and in face of the Ten Commandments, the second 
of which forbids the worshipping of images, or of “ any 
likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in 
the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.” 
These are the words of Almighty God. In this instance 
Moses was not the mouthpiece, but God Himself spake the 
words ; therefore this is the true order of Creation. 

Nevertheless modern so-called scientists and the great 
majority of Christian speakers and teachers discredit, and 
thus discard, the Mosaic account of the Creation without 
apology or reason. It was easy for opponents to say : 
“ What do you know of the science of the universe ? ” How¬ 
ever, _Dr. Woodhouse. Professor of Astronomy at Cambridge, 
candidly admitted that the advocates of a Plane-Earth could 
account for, and explain, the phenomena of the Universe 
as accurately as they (the Globularists) could, and, in ad¬ 
dition to this, they (the Zetetics) have their senses and the 
Scriptures in their favour, which, says the Professor, “ we 
have not.” 

Our opponents say : *“ Is it not rather late to question 
the globularity of the Earth ? ” “I say,” said her ladyship, 
“ >t is never too late to mend ; it is never too late to undo 
the work of Satan, and never too late to unveil Truth.” 

Lady Blount having pointed out that the globular theory 
of the Earth is a modern hypothesis opposed to the evidence 
of our God-given senses, mentioned that modern astrono- 

48 the editress at wood green. 

mers say that because the sun, moon, and planets are glob¬ 
ular, therefore the Earth must be globular ; but they may 
as well say that,as the lamps in the room in which the meeting 
was being held were globular, therefore the room itself was 
globular. There was nothing to show that the Earth is one 
of the heavenly bodies, or that any of those heavenly bodies 
are “ worlds.” The words in Hebrews i. 2, and xi. 3, trans¬ 
lated “ the worlds,” are tons aionas (the ages), whereas in 
Hebrew's i. 6, the terms, translated “the world,” differ 
and signify “ the inhabited earth.” 

It is deception of the worst kind to say that the Earth 
is one of the heavenly bodies ; but God has divided light 
from darkness, and day from night, by means of the heavenly 
bodies. Modern pseudo science annuls the Word of God, 
and no wonder the agnostic asks: “ What have you got to 
say for your Bible, and in defence of its veracity? ” 

The Copernican professing Christian finds the question 
to be quite unanswerable, and to such an one the Bible ceases 
to be “ The Bedrock of Truth.” We on the other hand 
take our stand upon the Impregnable Rock of Holy Sciipture. 

Her ladyship here presented those present with copies of 
a reprint from The Earth , explaining the disappearance of 
ships at sea by the true laws of perspective—water being 
also shown to be level— eg., when the hull of a ship has 
disappeared to the naked eye, it can often be reticle!ed vis¬ 
ible by a good telescope, thus proving that it has not gone 
down behind a hill of water, or over the horizon. 

In recent correspondence, in the London Evening Echo, 
in respect to Eclipses, her ladyship had put the following 
question : “ How was it that the ancients could foretell 
eclipses as well as modern ‘astronomers ? 

These arrogant globites too frequently bawl, ^ 

“ You pianists can’t explain eclipses at all ; 

This upsets your Bible, so down iL must fall 
With the errors of Moses”—hie, hie! 

Yet eclipse calculations on tables were wrought, 

Long before the Copernican theory was taught, 

And so this one Fact brings their boastings to naught, 

And proves their false “science” untrue. 

Also, it had been demonstrated that scientists of the 
globular school cannot prove that the Earth is globular be 
cause of the shadow over the sun or moon assuming a cir- 


4 9 

culai form. The sun and moon had both been seen above 
the horizon at the time of a lunar eclipse. Might not the 
shadow be caused by the intervention of one of the large 
cosmical bodies known to be in existence ? The noted 
“ Parallax ” had suggested this, and “ Zetetes ” thought that 
the moon’s eclipse might be caused by its getting into a 
mass of thick darkness, which revolves around and over the 
Earth in opposition to the sun. 

Lady Blount pointed out that the present-day scientists, 
who adopted the anti-biblical theory of the world being a 
globe, had kept altering the distance of the sun from the 
Earth from hundreds to millions of miles, whilst accepting the 
theory that we are rushing through space at the awful rate of 
about 63,000 miles an hour. The Church of Rome has shown 
herself up, because if it be true that she never alters—being 
semper eadem (always the same)—why did she persecute 
Galileo for saying that the Earth moves, and that very Church 
now accepts the teaching that the Earth is rushing through 
space at the rate of over 1,000 miles a minute ? If that Church 
was right in the beginning she was wrong now. The ancient 
Catholic Church evidently believed in the Mosaic account 
of Creation ; but she has departed from primitive teaching 
and gone so far as to render the Word of God ol no effect, 
doing away with the Sabbath as a memorial of the Creation! 
“ May the Lord help us, and lead us into all truth ! ” 

One or two questions having been asked and satisfactorily 
replied to by the speaker, Messrs. Brown, Nicholls, and 
others,expi essed the great satisfaction her ladyship’s address, 
which was of an instructive character, had given them, their 
faith in God’s Holy Word having been much strengthened. 

The meeting was closed with prayer for divine guidance 
and blessing through Jesus the Christ. 


Jly “ Rectangle .” 

{continued from p. 32). 

Is it possible to deliver men from the spell and sorcery 
of 1 great names ?’ If only a fable or lie is called scientific, 



and fathered by a writer reputed a ‘ great man,’ how many 
thousands believe at once without proof? Is it not as hard 
to turn men from the worship of their fellow-worms, as to 
turn a Hindoo from the worship of sticks and stones ? the 
scientific favourites of newspaper scribblers are larded ovei 
with flattery until the reputation of greatness is attained ; 
and to argue against pet scientific fictions is only to provoke 
silly jesting or astonishment at the presumption of daring 
to differ from the scientific slave-drivers. Will any of their 
slaves of science dare to be free, or use their common-sens^ ? 

“ Is geology not a tissue of suppositions from beginning 
to end ? Let us see. How do the Geologists manage to 
get dupes ? Some disguised infidel who has had sufficient 
influence to obtain a professorship in a college writes a book 
about the Creation, in which he attempts to prove to the 
entire satisfaction of atheistic journalists that the world made 
itself without the help of God at all. Of course the blas¬ 
phemous character of the book is carefully veiled, lest so t- 
headed religionists take alarm, and the book does not self 
Perhaps even a pious whine is dropped so that the work o 
Judas may be clone more effectually; and the author is re¬ 
puted a very great man , for all the newspapers say it. J>> 
way of preface astronomy is appealed to as a science so well- 
established that none but fools object to it; therefore, the 
reader must imagine all the vast continents and oceans 
making up a ball no larger than the school room globe. 
Next he is assured that recent researches in science have 
proved that those lights, the sun. moon, and stars, consist of 
the very same constituents as the earth and sea, as well as the 
nebula;, which science supposes to be clouds of glowing gas. 
So all these must have had a common origin, and, therefore, 
the simpleton must next imagine the school room globe 
along with sun, moon, and stars, changed , into a quantity o 
fiery gas. In the beginning— how many million years ago 
science cannot yet decide—was gas , is the dogma of Geo¬ 
logy. But he dare not ask about the origin of the gas itself. 
Then the mesmerist requires him to suppose that all the 
fiery mass very conveniently began to cool, particularly a 
quantity in the centre, which also whirled about until it 
became the sun. 

“The victim of duplicity is next to suppose that othci 
quantities also cooled until they changed into planets. 



Lspecially one quantity went on cooling until it conveniently 
became the earthball with a rocky crust, and though on fire 
originally, yet a portion of it changed into all the oceans 
and seas. ‘ In the study of science,’ says Dr. Dick in his 
book on Geology, ‘one is permitted to suppose anything if 
he will but remember and acknowledge to others that he only 
makes suppositions ; will give reasons to show that his sup¬ 
positions may be true, and be ready at any time to give up 
his suppositions when facts go against them. The last of 
these two suppositions, namely, the gradual cooling of the 
world from a state of intense heat, is often made by those 
who wish to form to themselves a notion of how the rocks 
and ri\ers, mountains and plains of the world have been 
brought to exist as they are.’ p. 10. Can the foolish Geo- 
logists, instead of making these absurd suppositions, not 
believe the fact that God made the world as stated on God’s 
own authority ? Instead, however, of opening their eyes 
they further suppose that despite the cooling, as much fire 
lemained inside the ball as heaved up the rocky crust into 
mountain chains, whilst the waters went on channelling and 
levelling so as to make all the river and ocean beds. Then 
the rivers would carry down to lakes and seas matter con¬ 
taining animal and vegetable remains to form sediment, which 
we must suppose hardened after millions of years into rocks, 
especially the stratified ones, the unstratified rock being 
supposed due to the original fire. All these atheistic sup¬ 
positions are expressed in words of Greek origin so as to 
amaze the gaping simpleton. The rocks immediately above 
the unsti atified are called mctamorphic. Next in ascending 
order are the pakeozoic or primary,the mesozoic or secondary, 
the cainozoic including the tertiary and quaternary. The 
guesses about fossils make up Palaeontology. 

Now let it be observed that not one of these suppositions 
is even probable. Whoever saw gas changed into granite, 
or a fiery vapour into water, or a river channel its own bed ? 
Is there within the memory of mankind one considerable 
mountain more or less on the earth—notwithstanding volcanic 
eruptions and earthquakes—one considerable country more 
or less, or what continent has materially changed its shape ? 
\\ hat do fossils prove ? The following is a confession from 
Skertchly’s Geology, p. 101 :—‘So imperfect is the record 
of the earth’s history, as told in these rocks, that we can 


5 ^ 

never hope to fill up completely all the gaps in the chain of 
life. The testimony of the rocks has been well compared 
to a history of which only a few imperfect volumes remain 
to us, the missing portions of which we can only fill up by 
conjecture. What botanist but would despair of restoring 
the vegetation of wood and field from the dry leaves that 
Autumn scatters ? Yet from less than this the Geologist 
has to form all his ideas of past floras. Can we wonder then 
at the imperfection of the geological world? Indeed it is 
confessed that the age of a fossil is not determined by the 
degree of its petrifaction, but by the age of the lock in 
which it is embedded ; and the age of the rock by its posi¬ 
tion among the strata. Have men in these last days become 
so silly that with old bones and stones, and footmarks, they 
may be led to deny the very God that made them ? But 
was not this foil)' foretold ages ago by the inspired Hebrew 
prophets ? 

(to be continued.) 


My much esteemed friend, the ltd. of 1 he luvth , hast 
requested me to write a short article dealing with the follow¬ 
ing questions, which have been put by a correspondent, 
(i) What distance the sun is from the Earth? (2) What 
is the diameter of the Earth? (3) How far off is the 
sun at rising or setting, so-called, say at 6 a.m. and 6 p.m., 
or between seasons ? (4) What is the law of light as to 

intensity and distance ? 

In our present remarks the article appearing in the last 
issue of The Earth, under the title of The Earth and Its 
Theorizers, must be taken as read. It was there stated that 
"the practical proofs that the sun is not 5.000 miles distant 
from the Earth would require a special article ; ” but we may 
offer some idea by giving two impromptu drawn sketches 
the first representing the sun at a supposed distance of 
95,000,000 feet (18,000 miles) ; it is marked on a scale of 
’-inch to 1,000 miles—as annexed : 



~f - 

A, the sun direct over its centre 
course ; B, the perpendicular line ; 
C, the shadow line ; D, the horizontal 
line from the equator to the place 
where the shadow is supposed to be 
taken, 3,000 miles north of the equa¬ 
tor, and, on the triangular principle, 
in March or September the shadow 
of the sun would be one foot from a 
perpendicular object six feet high. 
What actually occurs is altogether 
different. The supposed curve of the 
Earth in 3,000 miles could not in 
any reasonable conjecture account for 
the shadow' of six feet perpendicular 
being nearly seven feet on March 

Leaving the investigator to calcu¬ 
late on a scale of 95,000,000 miles, 
with 3,000 miles for the base, we 
may be excused for referring at this 
point to Mr. Davidson, who says that 
a spherist holds that the Earth’s dia¬ 
meter is 8,000 miles,its circumference 
being 24,000 miles. He instances 
the fact that the sun is visible at 
Midsummer from 3 a.m. to 9 p.m. 
This is fully explained in The Mid- 
Night Sun (a twopenny pamphlet by 
“ Zetetes ”), and further by M. Du 

C hail lu in I he Land op the Midnight Sun. In accepting 
the deduction that the earth and sea together form a vast 
circular plane—the surface of the standing water being level 
— when the sun is on or over the equator its light extends 
to the North Centre, and a spectator on or near the Arctic 
Circle can see it at midnight, the sun travelling round in a 
circle requiring 24 hours for its completion. 



We now direct our readers' attention to the following . 

B A 

E • V 


The foregoing is on a scale of one inch to 1,000 miles, 
'lake A as the sun ; B, the line of the sun s course north 
of the equator from March 21st to June 21st; C. shadow 
line 3,000 miles north of the sun’s centre course; D hori¬ 
zontal line from the equator to the place where the shadow 
of the sun was taken ; K, the perpendicular line of the sun s 
centre course ; F, the perpendicular line of the sun on J une 
cist when the sun is said to be 23 deg. 27 m. north of the 
equator, i.e., 1,407 miles. By subtracting 1,407 miles from 
3 000 miles, the distance of the south of Hampshire north 
of the equator, leaves a balance of 1 ,593 ™ ,es to form the 
base line of the triangle. The shadow of any perpcndiculai 
object 12 feet high, being 6 ft. 2 in. long, let us take Hi 93 
miles for the base line, the oblique line slanting m the 
proportion of 6 ft. 2 in. horizontally, and 12 ft. in the per¬ 
pendicular position ; the proportion of the oblique me would 
be 12 miles rise to 6 miles and one-sixth in the horizontal 
line. Coming to the final result we find by the distance 

the constituent elements of natural holies. 


of the horizontal line to the same perpendicular posi¬ 
tion, on June 21st, of the oblique line, is that it reaches the 
height of 3,100 miles—as the distance of the sun above the 

This method of demonstrating the distance of the sun 
from the Earth may be proved at a distance of about 2,000 
miles north, and the same south of the sun’s centre course 
on March 21st, or September. 

The third question as to any differentiation in the altitude 
of the sun at 6 a.m. and 6 p.m., is nullified by the position 
taken up by Zetetics. 

In regard to the fourth question': “What is the law of 
light as to intensity and distance?” We opine that most 
of the professors are “ in the dark ” upon this subject. The 
dictionary makers describe light as “that which makes 
objects v isible ” (absence of darkness). We know that this 
is a negative explanation ; but who can tell what is light? 
God said, “Let there be light” before He made the lights 
in the firmament, and the “two great lights, the greater 
light to rule the night,” day and night being caused by the 
motion of the sun over a stationary Earth—lengthening 
the day or shortening it according to its position and mo¬ 
tions, sailing around the Earth as around an island—for, as 
Peter says, the Earth is standing (as ships at anchor) “ in 
the water and out of the water ; ” but of course there are 
laws governing light. To enter further upon this subject 
would however require another article. 




“ EARTH, water, air, and fire include all natural bodies.” 
This theory, which was propounded by Anaximenies, B.C. 
548, passed current amongst scientists until Dr. Priestley 
“ discovered ” and published (1774-79) that air is not a simple 
element, but a compound of different gases. Cavendish 
about the same time, “ discovered ” that water is not a simpl; 

-f, xnr coxstituext elf.mkxts or xatukai, bodies- 

element, but a compound of oxygen and hydrogen. Sii 
Humphrey Davy.“ discovered,” in the early part of the 19th 
century, that earth is not a simple element, but the oxide 
of a metal. Materialists have since attempted to prove that 
the different sorts of matter (65 in number) are the con¬ 
stitutional elements of all natural bodies light, heai, elec- 
tricity, force, and life being merely “ conditions of matter. 

The foregoing theory not being satisfactory, and, believing 
that the 65 supposed elements are different sorts of mattei, 
i have come to the conclusion that heat is caloric, and that 
force is motor ; that matter, caloric and motor, form the 
constituent elements of all natural bodies and that each 
element exists in three states—“ under the control of God s 
Law.” 1 submit them in a tabulated form, as the basis of 
scientific knowledge : — 

t . r ! *Mr \'i 

O • God’s Law—which controls 
- , Solid .a ( 4 - Latent 5 I 7- Chemical 

2 I 2. J.'iuid o J 5. Sensible o «• Mechanical 

~ | 3. \'aj)our C I. 6. Luminous S [9. Vital 

Matter. —Solid matter is made manifest in the solid 
earth. Fluid matter is made manifest in the Great World’s 
ocean ; in the negative electric fluid with which the Earth and 
its ocean are charged—and in the positive electric fluid 
enveloping the Great \\ orld. 

Caloric.— Latent caloric (latent heat) was discovered m 
1 7 56 by Dr. Black, and is found to be a constituent element, 
in "chemical union with the other two elements, in definite 
quantities, in all bodies. Water contains 140 degrees, and 
steam 950 degrees, but, while latent, its presence cannot be 
detected by any known means. Sensible caloric (Lee heat) 
affects the temperature of bodies, and the quantities associ¬ 
ated with them can be measured by the thermometer and, 
while it continues in this state, it is free to pass from one 
body of matter to another without altering their chemical 
constitutions.—Luminous caloric renders the matter with 
which it exists incandescent, or luminous to the sense of 

sight, and v isible in the dark. 

Motor.—C hemical motor unites the other two elements 
and unites with them, in definite quantities, to form bodies. 
Mechanical motor alters the positions of the bodies after they 

f ur 

m[ v 



are formed without altering their chemical compositions. 
Vital motor is associated with animal and vegetable life, and 
is communicated to animals in the oxygen gas which forms 
part of the air they inhale—the positive electricity in such 
gas supplying the vital force for pulsation and muscular 
action and the latent heat in such gas supplying the free 
heat necessary to animal life, while it is transforming, by 
combining with the carbon which it takes from the veins, 
blood into the carbonic-acid-gas they exhale. 

About 25 years ago, M. Martin proved before the Acad¬ 
emy of Science, Paris, that oxygen gas consists of oxygen 
chemically combined with positive electricity—and that hy¬ 
drogen gas consists of hydrogen chemically combined with 
negative electricity. 

It will also be seen by the foregoing tabulated arrange¬ 
ment, and explanations, that the figures'1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7^8, 
9 - figuiativelv lepiesent the nine states of the three constit¬ 
uent elements of natural bodies, and that the O figuratively 
1 cpiesents Gods Law (of action and re-action , equal and 
opposite) controlling God's Earth and the mechanical move¬ 
ments of bodies on His Earth—which the Bible plainly says 
is “founded upon the waters; standing in and out of the 



As you say, in your letter under date Aug. ;.th, the death 
of Mr. Me I lines is a loss to the Zetetic Society, and I note 
your reference to one of Mr. Me Innes’pamphlets, in which 
he states that “the secret of the proportion between the 
radius and the circumference of a circle is revealed in 
1 Kings vii. 23. This verse states that the molten sea was 
ten cubits from brim to brim, and that a line of thirty cubits 
encompassed it round about— i.e., the ratio is 1 to 3.” You 
go on to say : we “ knoiv however by actual experiment that 
the ratio is approximately 7 to 22.” 

1 may be somewhat obtuse, but I fail to see that the ratio 
of 1 to 3, and a ratio “APPROXIMATELY 7 to 22,” can be 


5 « 

construed into anything approaching a contradiction of 
terms or facts. The resultants in both instances aie prac¬ 
tically the same. 

The Tabernacle was built according to the express com¬ 
mand of God ; but the Temple, Solomon’s house, and the 
House of the Forest of Lebanon, were only built by the 
Lord’s permission. The Tabernacle was a type of worship 
on earth (which has a temporary character) every part of 
it, and every vessel, or other appliance to be used in it was 
made according to a divinely appointed pattern ; but we 
have no divine revelation that the measurements set forth in 
l Kings vii. can be applied to measurements concerning the 
Earth. Therefore any deductions that our fallible minds 
may arrive at must be taken at their true value. 

The letters in The Echo on the subject of The Shape of 
the Earth have been of a varied character ; but on the whole 
the plane-earth averment has been upheld. Mr. Davidson, 
a freelance investigator, said that the spherists believe our 
large ships can sail, bottom upwards, on the outer margin 
of a spherical world, revolving at a terrific velocity, without 
falling into the surrounding abyss of empty space, which he 
(Mr. Davidson) held to be a physical impossibility. Newton’s 
hypothetical laws of the Earth’s attraction do not help to 
support the theorem of a spherical world, because Newton’s 
apple inevitably fell to the earth by its own intrinsic weight, 
being heavier than the surrounding atmosphere. The 
pianists hold that the earth and sea are extended planes, on 
which men and ships are securely kept within certain limits 
by the great and permanent mountains of ice which, as a 
demonstrated fact, surround the world on which we live, 
move, and have our being. 

“ Iconoclast” has also pointed out that there is no actual 
cuivation of the horizon. Builders on the coast, when their 
work runs parallel to the horizon, repeatedly make use ot it 
to true their work perfectly horizontal. 

As to relative distances north and south of the equator, 
it goes without saying that the navigator attaches great 
importantance to these distances. Difference of opinion 
exists on this point, but of course if it is proved t hat the 
distance between longitude 20 east and 60 west north of the 
equator is shorter than that between the same meridians 
south of the equator, then the theory of the Earth’s spheric¬ 
ity would be exploded. 




Our esteemed correspondent, Mr. Middleton, has promised 
in due course to furnish further information in this direction. 
As to the inference that he makes a great deal of the 
difference in temperature between the Gulf of Pichili 
and Lisbon, in about the same latitude ; it is averred 
that a similar thing is observable in the case of some other 
places ; e.g., the Gulf of St. Lawrence is frozen six months 
in the year, and Quebec is in about the same latitude, 48 N 
nearer the Equator than London. The river Danube, be¬ 
tween 42 and 46 N, is frozen in u'inter, but the rivers in 
France in the same latitude are not closed to navigation for 
that reason. 

This will all be accounted for later on. But the foregoing 
“ puzzles” cannot be answered off-hand, nearing in mind 
that there is extant a popular fallacy in connection with 
“degrees,’’ explained in some measure by “ Zetetes’” pam¬ 
phlet, The Midnight Sun. 

It is probable that the sun is not the sole factor which 
determines the amount of heat received on different parts 
of the Earth’s surface—though the sun is the great heat 
afforder. Again, taking the Earth as a globe, the length of 
the degrees running along any meridional line would be 
much the same as the length of the degrees running round 
the Equator ; but, if the Earth be a plane, then all the mer¬ 
idian lines, instead of being arcs of circles will be straight 
and horizontal. A meridian of longitude on the globe theory 
would be about 6,250 statute miles long from the so-called 
pole to the Equator; but, on the Plane-Earth system, it 
would be about 4,000 miles, representing 44 miles to a de¬ 
gree instead of 69J ; but equatorial degrees being taken 
along a circle, would be uniform, whilst meridional degrees, 
being taken along a plane surface, would differentiate with 
the distance from the Equator. 

Admitting these variants we arrive at a possible solution 
in respect to differences of temperature inexplicable upon 
the globular theory of the Earth ; yet, whether the altitude 
of the sun differs at different periods of the day and year 
seems a question that cannot as yet be answered definitely, 
or clearly proved apart from hypothetical conclusions. 
Personally, we believe it does not. But our personal belief 
carries no weight without substantial proofs. 

Further considerations must be held over for the present. 




The Real Reason Why. 

In the New Testament there are many warnings given us 
against false teachers and false doctrines. 

The apostle Peter says that as there were false prophets 
amongst the Israelites of old, so “ shall there be amongst 
you (Christians),who privily shall bring in damnable heresies. 

“ And many,” he adds, “shall follow their pernicious ways; 
by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken 
of .’’-—2 Pet. ii. i, 2. 

We see the fulfilment of this prophecy in our own day. 
Ungodly teachers, and even some who profess to be Chris¬ 
tians, are bringing in speculations, and doctrines in the 
name of religion and “science” which are rapidly under¬ 
mining belief in the inspiration of the Bible, and the doc¬ 
trines of the Christian religion. 

When the enemy of mankind tempted the Man Christ 
Jesus he first tried to corrupt Him morally, by offering the 
world’s wealth if He would only Low down and worship him. 
Failing to so ensnare Him, he afterwards tried to take away 
His life, and he succeeded through human instruments in 
his awful and murderous aim. But God raised Jesus from 
the dead, and afterwards took Him bodily to heaven. 

With the followers of Christ he reversed the plan. He 
at first caused many of them to be put to death ; but still 
the truth of God flourished. 

Then through the Emperor Constantine he offered them 
wealth and worldly advancement. This corrupted many, 
and true faith seemed to decline. The “ dark ages closed 
in over the world ; and the true faith was hidden in the 
secret and inaccessible places of the Earth. 

Still the truth existed ; and some “ chosen vessels ” in all 
ages kept the Commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus, 
and held fast also to Bible Cosmogony. 

Then the Reformation blazed forth “ and light was sown 
for the righteous.” Truth came to the front again. Printing 
was discovered. The Bible was printed in the vulgai tongue. 
The enemy prompted his human instruments and agents 



to seek out, and even to buy up, all the Bibles they could 
find, so that the Word of God might be destroyed, and the 
Bibles be burnt that the light of Truth might be extinguished. 
But better Bibles were printed and more of them. Thus the 
truth triumphed and so the plan failed. 

Profitting by past experience, the enemy grew more subtle 
and a deeper plan was laid. The multiplication of Bibles 
could not be stopped, therefore let them be corrupted. So 
“ Catholic ” translations of the Bible were printed/corrupting 
the original texts in favour of idolatry and Mariolatry. Still 
faithful translations multiplied and they did good work, 
strengthening the minds of men and purifying their hearts 
by faith. 

And now a deeper scheme came into operation. Men 
sprang up in our seats of learning, and in famous universities 
on the continent, who threw doubt upon the Bible as a mere 
human book or compilation of books, uninspired and un¬ 
scientific. This scheme prospered and has attained vast 
proportions, and it seems now likely to succeed where other 
plans have failed. 

So that an earnest word of warning is needed against 
these false doctrines which are everywhere corrupting the 
minds of men from the simplicity of the truth and faith in 
God. Take for instance the writings of the so-called 


They first attack the authority of the New Testament. 
But this was happily defended by men equally learned, who 
proved the epistles of Paul were genuine and the four gospels 
faithful narratives of historical events. 

The downgrade critics now attack the Old Testament, and 
their chief attacks are directed against Genesis in particular 
and the Pentateuch in general. They see in Genesis the 
foundation of the Hebrew and Christian religions, so its 
authority must be overthrown. 

The account of Creation is supposed therefore to be a 
“myth.” Men raised up by God, such as Abraham, Isaac, 
Israel, Moses, and others, are supposed to be merely poetical 
“ heroes.” No proof is given, but their theory requires these 
hypotheses. The Bible is said to be only a human pro¬ 
duction, and the miraculous history of Israel in the past is 
nothing more than poetical fiction and exaggeration. 


] talks. 

These so-called “ higher critics ’’ are trying to lower every¬ 
thing that is good in connection with our most holy faith. 
They would level everything downwards which is connected 
with a Personal God. They ought therefore to be called 
the Downgrade Critics, or the Lower Critics. 

But the fault with these destructive critics is that they are 
not critical enough ; they attempt to pull down but do net 
try to build up. Their objections against the Bible and its 
divine inspiration are for the most part subjective, and 
elaborated out of their own inner consciousness and not from 
historical evidence, or even from the facts of Nature. 

But these Lower Critics are being answered by educated 
men who have formed themselves into what is called “ 1 he 
Bible League.” We wish them God speed in their good 
work. Their efforts in support of the Inspiration of the 
Bible are in harmony with the work of true Zetetics. We 
only wish that they could see the truth of Zeteticism. We 
think it would help them much in their good work. 

In a book entitled Criticism Criticised , containing a num¬ 
ber of addresses on Old Testament Criticism, one writer, 
F. E. Spencer, M.A., well says : “ It is well for those who 
steer to see rocks ahead. In some subtle and diffusive 
influences there lurks manifest danger. It is a STRONO 
DELUSION which boasts to see no more the glory and the 
handiwork of Jehovah in the universe, but only the glory of 

Copernicus, and Newton, and Darwin, and others.I he 

fear of God is gone when there remains no traces of Mis 

The Reason oe it All. 

There are some who cannot sec this, and who, therefore, 
give these destructive critics credit not only for honesty, but 
for godliness! Yet these men attack the Word of God 
while the astronomers are secretly undermining our faith in 
the Creation of God. In fact God is being spirited away as 
it were both from If is Word and His Works. 

If a fortress was being attacked on all sides, time after 
time, persistently and with all the force of modern inventions 
and science, we should be poor logicians if we could not 
see that there must be some strong reason tor all this ex¬ 
penditure of time, talent, and force. The fortress must be 

levelling and theodolite: work. 


something very valuable, or it must contain something very 
valuable. Or, on the other hand, it must be peculiarly ob¬ 
noxious to the beseiging party and obstructive to their final 
aims, to call forth such persistent and powerful attacks. 

(to be continued , D.J\) 


In a trade journal for building operatives, entitled Building 
World , during the end of 1900 and beginning of 1901, 
Professor Henry Adams, M.I.C.E., wrote an article on Level¬ 
ling and 7 heodolite Work , and in Vol. xi., No. 271, p. 242, 
he explains a level line thus : 

“A level line is a line that is everywhere equi-distant 
from the centre of the earth, although for short distances 
it may be taken as the same as a ‘ horizontal line,’ which 
is at right angles to a radius of the earth where the level 
is set up, or a tangent to a ‘great circle.’ ” 

He illustrates the difference between a true level and ap¬ 
parent level thus : 

Levelling and Theodolite Work. 

But, without going into his calculations in connection with 
curvature, let us examine his illustration. He has made a 
“ true level ” a curved line, and a straight line an “ apparent 
level.” But how does that work out in practice P When we 
start any works, either large or small, we always start from 

c 4 


a "level'' line, and that a perfectly straight one ; all found¬ 
ations are levelled with a “straight-edge” that has been 
tested and proved to be perfectly straight and all plum 
or vertical lines are at right-angles to the level or horizontal 
ones. Every foreman considers Ins work true when done 
in accordance with the foregoing rules, but according to 

,1 _ C~.~ -tte* \-r\ 

1 rtLt-ui \j ciiicw " -o o i r 

rofessor Adams it is only apparently so, and for us to get 
a true level we should have to use slightly curved straig it- 

<1 II UC H.VU >vv- .- ~~ a - 

edges, and according to his diagram, if one outside wall were 
at right angles to our level, or what he calls “appaient 
level,” the other would be at an obtuse angle (see extended 
dotted lines on diagram). Yet if Professor Adams were 
to get two plummets attached to the largest and finest \\ne 
he could obtain, like Foucault’s Pendulum, and hang them 
at a certain distance apart he would find that they wou c 
hang perfectly parallel by the most delicate measurements, 
whereas, according to his diagram, they should be wider at 
the top than the bottom, because both plummets should be 
pointing to the centre of the Earth, and, by way of furthei 
proof, if he were to get a level line between the two plumb 
lines, he would find that it would be right angles to both 
lines, whereas (according to his diagram) if it was at right 
angles to the one it would be an obtuse angle to the other 
(see A and B on diagram) so that practice and theory do 
not work one with the other. But what puzzles me is that 
a Professor and an M.l.C.K. should make such assertions 
without the slightest proof ; ii he were to start his lessons, 
by giving a valid proof of the Earth’s rotundity, then there 
would be no need of the word theory in connection with the 
“ globe.” But in absense of proof common-sense should 

reign supreme. - ir V A \ S 

Crockham Hill. c - k - LVA * Nh - 


1 thank you for the copies of The Echo and other 
papers for perusal, which I have read with interest, and 

which I now return. 



I think I may claim to be a “pianist” born, for my first 
convictions were—concerning Earth, sea, and stars— 

(') A Axed and stationary Earth (dryland). 

(2) “The gathering together of the waters called He 


(3) 1 he sun, moon, and stars, are lights in the firma¬ 

ment of heaven. 

M>' fi’st lessons in Geography, being contrary to the tenets 
of reason, tended to deepen such convictions. I was taimht 
that “the earth moves on its own axis,” and, on askfng 

“What is its axis?’ the same Geography answered, “the 

axis is an imaginary line, &c.” 

Some years afterwards I came across The Earth Not a 
Globe by “Parallax,” (small edition), the perusal of which 
was further confirmation. Then my brother was privileged 
to hear “Parallax” lecture on several successive evenino- s 
some years before, and it was interesting and instructive^to 
learn with what ability he was able to floor all comers wTe 
and otherwise. ’ 

Difficulties of course there are—which we are bound to 
admit—whatever view of God’s works we take, and it surely 
is no sign of weakness to admit the fact. Things there are 
ioe do not know, and for the matter of that no'one knows, 
though some profess to know measures, weights and dis¬ 
tance infinite. The Lords says, otherwise Jer. xx’xi. 37. 

In much of our literature there appears to be repetition, 
but, by comparison, we have far less unnecessary repetition 
than our opponents. We do speak that we know, and that 
net by tradition, but by practical facts after examination. 

One asks me, What great men have you on your side ? 
It matters not who is, or who is not, on our side, the truth 
remains—whether our convictions agree or not—great men 
are not ahoays wise. 

^ "’ill be pleased to know that a growing interest in the 
filth is still being taken by many young men in their Classes 
m the -North, and we have several invitations to address 
them on the subject. 1 have accepted one invitation ; and in 
Uctober it is proposed to have first a Lantern Lecture and 
f .°' v ^ V e s fifi es I have had made of the diagrams from 
parallax s” large edition (about 60 slides), with other 
news showing the result in line perspective by photography, 
hen, the following Frida)- evening, one holding opposite 



views will debate with me the principles involved. We look 
for an interesting time, of which you may hear more in 
due course. To do justice to so great a subject, with its 
many parts, deserves more than 1 can give it in ability, time, 

and treasure. . 

It were well for the cause if there were more connected 
with it who could, or would, shew the enthusiasm and energy 
you have done and are still doing. Some of us are prepared 
to rest satisfied with much less evidence than others desne. 
To us the Word of God is evidence enough. 

The ancients,who held the Cosmogony of Moses, as handed 
down for ages, were wise—they did not make the mistakes, 
nor admit the changes, that great (?) men do now when 
discussing the Earth. We need not go into the stars ; but 
I suppose there is no living astronomer who can account 
for'the phases of the moon, visible during the past week, on 
their present theory of the moon’s phases. On Aug. 25th, 
at 9 a.m., the sun was seen in the heavens, in close proximity 

,0,hcm ° 01 ’- ISAAC SMITH. 

In our next issue we shall commence two important arti¬ 
cles—one bv Dr. Riches, entitled: Stretched Out Upon the 
H aters,- and another from the Gentleman's Magazine (1823) 
on the true Cause of the I ides. 

IMPORTANT NOTICE— Several letters and Postal 
Orders having been lost in the Post, the Ed. would deem it 
a favour if correspondents would kindly register all letters 
and packets containing either money or MSS. 

WANTED.—A copy of Carp enters too Proofs , with Ap¬ 
pendix, No. 12. The Ed. of The Earth would deem it a 
personal favour if any of our readers could forward a copy ot 
the above. 

Lord's Day .—The Organ of the Sabbath Keepers’ Union. 
Edited and co-published by the Ed. of The Fa'Th rice, 
One Penny, Monthly. Printed and co-published by Mr, 
S. M. Brown, Commerce House, Wood Green, London, . . 

the earth’s observatory. 


All communications and enquiries respecting this Magazine and the teaching it 

"/a m B nd ,f l r q i U ‘ St 'V tS S Hd J ”i? ter for inserti °”> should be addressed to 
E.A.M.B., II, Gloucester Road, Kingston Hill. auuressea io 


The Ed. does not necessarily endorse statements made under the headings of ‘ ■ The 
Earths Observatory, Letters, etc., unless signed Ed. The Earth. 

SEVERM years ago Professor S. P. Langley devised a.r instrument by means 
of which a change of temperature of less than one hundred thousandth part of 
a degree could be detected. This was a noteworthy accomplishment buThe 
now announces that it has been greatly exceeded. He ha S P found it’possible 
to observe a difference of temperature so small as one-hundred-milliomh of a 
degree By means of this instrument Professor Langley has studied the radia- 

^r^etdZ the an surfa e ce fi " dS ‘° * «“*■ ** «* *e sun’s 

I he article goes on to say : “ Though the moon is not self-luminous, and the 
light by winch we see it is reflected sunlight, a large proportion of non-luminous 

KZS ” 0re than ° ne - half 0f the t0tal Station-™ 

This investigation is still being carried on as opportunity occurs, so further 
information upon the radiations of the moon may be expected.” 

I he above extracts are from the Leisure Hour, August, p. 880. 

So rere is another tradition of our school days gone—hut the school books I 
suppose, remain the same. I must leave it to others to harmonize the appar- 

made a P d°tn e State "- ent - glVen ab ° Ve ’ tllou S h ' as more experiments are toV 
made and the investigation is consequently incomplete, it would be advisable 
to wait until they have been brought to a conclusion._F.N. 

LADY BLOUNT IN WOOD GKEEN.-In Bowes Park and neighbourhood 

fllf and 6 m ? mbe ? K f M le U , nlv . ersal Zetetic Society (believers that fhe earth is 
flat and not a globe !) and there are also Christian Sabbath-keepers, and the 

rrern SS o( r/ f £a f i addressed a meeting of them at 327, High Road, Wood 
urecn, on last bunday evening. 

Her ladyship combatted the Hypothesis of the earth being a globe, and said 
that, according to the Bible, the earth has immovable foundations. She quoted 

tefis "• J I w h n V, “‘ l 3 ’ and Psalnls xci - 1 and xcvi - 10., and frotn these 

Word oTr^H Y t lC eart j “ ■ n °[ 3 revolvin S P lanet - According to the 
Word of God she also urged, it is the sun which moves round the earth, and 

lot the earth which moves about the sun, and this nullifying of the Holv 

Hhe P sIhLrh e ti 3re t ’ 0,1 , S Par W , ilh man ’ s chan g' n g of the seventh da'v 

the Sabbath of the Lord to the heathen festival of Sunday 

Hie meeting was closed with praver ." — The Sentinel Au" 13th 



“ \R1' WE MOVING?— A Strange Letter anil Some Reflections on it. We 
have received^ letter which must be from one of the Bible believers that the 
world is flat, who, as reported last week, were addressed in Wood Green the 
other Sunday evening by Lady Blount. The writer—A. Mould— calls it 
little bit on higher education 1 ! She—the hand-writing is feminine—sajs : 

I have a little girl going to the Board school and she says sometimes 
the curate comes and gives the children a lesson out of the Bible, and 1 
suppose that he would tell them that God made the sun and moon for lights 
and to divide the day from the night and for signs and seasons and tor 
days and years. And I suppose he would also read Joshua x. chapter, where 
we find : ‘ And the sun stood still and the moon stayed...So the sun stood 
still in the midst ofheaven and hasted not to go down about a whole day. 

Now sir if the sun stood still at that time I understand that it must have 
been in the habit of going round our earth before, and ever since. Now, 
sir, as a Christian, I believe all this and teach my children to believe it too 
Well, then comes a lesson by one of the teachers on Geography, 
she tells the children that the sun does not move, but that our earth goes 
round the sun. Strange, but false, I say. How do 1 know . Perhaps 
you can tell me. Or, shall I tell you that God made our earth so sure that 
it shall not move at any time. Hath God forgotten all this, and is it some 
imp of mischief that is turning our earth round at the rate of more than a 
thousand miles an hour ? ... , 

But on the other hand, if the Lord he God, why don t men and women 
believe him? We have been asking God to save the King, \ es l say 
‘God save our king and queen, God save and bless and keep ns all. ut 
why don’t the people serve the God, and praise Him ? 1 hen shall the ear i 
bring forth her increase and God, even our God, shall bless u«. 

This 1 religious belief’ is doubtless 1 conscientious,’ and supposing the believers 
find money enough for a building, and 30 scholars, the State, under the new 
Education Bill, will, we suppose, maintain the school in which this peculiar 
geography will be taught! Wliat more surprises us is the little girl- 
statement that the 1 curate ’ gives lessons in ‘ the Board school . What curate 
and what school ? The letter—though so strange m its contents—bear, the 
stamp of being quite genuine though no address is given.” / he .Si'//r/««,Aug. •> 

GREY B ATT'LESil IPS. All newlv commissioned ships in the British Navv 
are in future to be painted grey, the hulls, funnels, masts, and boats being all 
of the same shade. O.her nations have been devoting attention to the possi- 
bililv of making their warships invisible at short distances at sea, and at last 
the British Admiralty has taken the matter up with this result.- The Star, 13HII- 
I If the horizon is a fixed limit , and it should be were the world a globe, why not 
save the expense of grey painting, and hide just beyond the horizon when 
ihe enemv is about ?—Kd. | 

the EARTH (Kingston Hill: 11, Gloucester Road).— This publication 
which is described as a magazine of sense and science, is to hand, and is intended 
for the months of August and September. It contains many articles, one ol the 
most interesting being “Signalling by Heliograph,' by E. E. Middleton. 
Fh Urn's Keiil A)gits. 



TRUE LAWS OF PERSPECTIVE; by “B.”- A reprint oftlris ariicTe fs 
now ready; copies may be obtained from the Ed. 

The Scriptural Cosmogony has only been rejected by educated men in Europe 
since the times of Copernicus and Newton. Prior to this period all educated 
men believed in the Mosaic account of .Creation. The true nature and order of 
the Umierse affects and interests men and women of all nationalities, and many 
thousands of individuals in all the different countries of the world have labelled 
the Scripture-contradicting globular theory, as 



“ I am pretty well through your books, but fear I cannot assimilate your ideas 
as I was brought up a mathematician, and went in for trigonometry and astron- 
omy. I hnd that the question of light alone upsets the whole mass of evidence 
you have so cleverly put fo th. Please don’t be angry with me. 

It will rather startle you when I tell you that I was introduced to Parallax 
and heard him lecture once. Parallax told me how he became hypnotized with 
the idea when seven years old, and, after one hour’s discussion with me he 
acknowledged that the laws of light completely upset his theory, and he sold 
out, t° Ij 10 - Hampden a very honest simple-minded man, all his copyrights and 
stoHof books for £lo0, five days after and came out with a company advertiz- 
ing Dr. Bir ey s 1 hosphorous ’’—and I found after that he had been a Dr. at 
Liverpool, and was struck off the list for some illegal practices, and had passed 
under seven different names—including Rowbottom, Parallax, and Birley Dr 
i J O’ the homoeopath, had searched through the British Museum and found 
this for me. 

I metJno. Hampden after this, and got from him how he was taken in bv 
the horizon puzzle at sunset, and seeing ships masts first. Hampden was short 
sighted and eould not see through an astronomical telescope distinct objects. 
Mine I had in Belfast—an 8-ft. Newtonian—twenty times the power of Newton’s 
own ones. As for the Bedford Level, a wager was laid-Jno. Hampden against 
Alfied Russell Wallace—that it was as you say ; but it was proven to be exactlv 
as given in astronomical works, but, being a wager, the judges (legal) compelled 

river tudv level 10 retUr1 ’ ^ £50 ° “ W&S " 0t & Wager to P rove the Bedford 

Now they are going towards the South Pole, and may come to the Magnetic 
Pole—as they did to the North Pole—and this is changing yearly in a spiral 
curve as the earth toppling, varies its position during rotation, so that it may 
easilv be inferred that at one time or other the present equinoxial line, in parts 
may become the North and South Poles. Think of Parallax assuming the sun’s 
distance to be j 00 miles; and the distance of the sun at rising time (sav 15 
o clock) to be 8,000 miles off, while at 12 it is only 500 when overhead—while 
ihe light s intensity for photography is exactlv the same, in place of being the 


difference of ihe squares of these distances—-or as 1 is to *25t>. Your distance 
would make this less somewhat of course, but still contrary to all the laws of 

Please take my word for my heartfelt sympathy for you in your desire to stick 
to truth. We are all liable to err. When f first heard of mesmerism I condemned 
it as trickery—for I had paid for lessons in jugglery—and I travelled by coach 
30 miles to expose it at a public exhibition, but I was allowed to test subjects 
and I demons'rated my own power in it, much to the delight of the mesmerist 
and the large audience. I demonstrated clairvoyance as well; so I feel for you 
very much ; but please think over what I have told you. 

When I wrote for information I had no idea that anybody in your positiosi 
could be associated with the idea, and I was tardy in revealing what I knew of 
the originator of the idea, feeling it must shock you to know this. 1 may fur¬ 
ther tell you that J. Hampden complained to me of Parallax after selling outto 
him, then telling him that the sun’s distance must be materially augmented to 
account for certain phenomena, without saying what these were, and he looked 
on him as a renegade to his teachings and an unprincipled man when it was 
purely hypnotic ignorance without calculation ; purely assumption. 

Yours very truly, J. W. 

The above letter is written by one whom we esteem very much, but as it con¬ 
tains statements often repeated to us with a view of upholding the globular 
teaching, we think it best to print it with a short reply, as follows. 

Our correspondent, who says he was “ brought up a mathematician, is sur¬ 
prised we believe in the plain truth as set forth by Moses regarding Cosmogony. 
He says that the “ laws of light ” completely upset Parallax’s teaching and that 
he acknowledged it. In the first place I would state that neither myself not 
the one to whom I am indebted for having exposed to me the unscripturalness 
of the Globe theory, have yet read Parallax’s works, and I am only conversant 
with a few paragraphs from his writings through having seen them quoted in 
other people’s articles. The fact that we desired to re-publish Parallax s Earth 
AW a Globe , will show that we had a high opinion of that work, based upon 
the opinion of those whose judgment we esteem very highly. 

Nevertheless, we must admit that personally we differ from the conclusions 
arrived at by Parallax in some tilings. Also, we cannot close our eyes to the 
fact that however valuable the weight of evidence from a learned standpoint, and 
from learned individuals, may be in unveiling the truth and in proving to un¬ 
believers that the Bible is scientifically accurate in every tine, and is the very 
Truth, yet it should be remembered that neither mathematicians, nor 
any human beings or methods, are the originators of Truth. And true Cos¬ 
mogony is no more a man-made invention than the way of salvation. 

But as Parallax is dead and cannot speak for himself our correspondent l ad 
better leave personal matters and give us those “ laws of light, * which he 
thinks demolish our teaching. He says that if the sun were as near to the earth 
as we affirm it is, the intensity of light, for photographic purposes, would be 
very different at sunrise from what it is at noon ; whereas, he affirms “ the light s 
intensity for photography is practically the same.” Whatever may be the in¬ 
tensity of the chemical rays required by photography common observation shows 
that the intensity of the light of the sun is greater at noon than it is immediately 
after sunrise. 

If Parallax was “hypnotized ” we should think it would be by some argument 
more powerful than this. It is the old juggler’s trick of getting his audience to 
look up at the ceiling while he manipulates something on the table ! 

If our critics want us to change our views respecting the shape of the Earth 
they must com: down to the earth, and not try to hypnotize us by gazing above 
an 1 talking vague generalities about “ the laws of light ” ! /.etetes has offered 



proof in former numbers of The Earth that the astronomers are as far from the 
truth respecting the laws of light as they are respecting the general structure of 
the universe, and the shape of the Earth. We beg to refer our critics to these 

Personally the Word of God is our chart, but nevertheless, we hope never to 
underestimate the valuable testimony of such mental athletes as Zetetes, Parallax, 
Rectangle, E. E. Middleton, H. H. Squire,Dr.E. W.Bullinger, Gen.E. Armstrong 
Xaxier Field, and other men far too numerous to name individually, all of whom 
have done their best to support the true Cosmogony. 

“ I think 'J he Earth is really what it claims to be, a magazine of sense and 
science.”—C. R. E. 

“ The Earth magazine increases in value and interest every month.”—J. L. 

Dear Lady Blount,—I have to thank you very much for the August number of 
your very interesting, suggestive, and stimulative monthly The Earth. It is not 
often we find a work on scientific lines (and especially when it takes an attitude 
adverse to the modern received opinion) carried on with such force and candour. 

It seems to me, that a work of this nature is particularly useful in inciting 
people to think; and if it is capable of that, it accomplishes much; for of all 
things it is the most difficult to get the ordinary human being to think ; and so 
unwittingly he gives the palm to modern notions, and shelves the statements 
of Scripture. 

I have read the current number of The Earth with great interest and am glad 
to find that the meeting at Christ Church (where I had the pleasure of meeting 
you) was useful and satisfactory. 

May He who made the heav’ns and earth, 

And seas and all therein ; 

So ore' men’s eyes; dispel the dearth 
Of interest, truth to win. 

With much respect, yours faithfully, 

Most Rev. C. I. STEVENS, D.D., LED., etc. 


Answer to G. W. YVinckler, Esq., C.E.—Kindly note that the letter you refer 
to, from C. W. Asher, C.E., comes under the heading of The Earth's Observa¬ 
tory, p. 30. 


(L—How is it possible that the sun, moon, and stars could freely move as 
they do “ in the heavens,” or finnament , if it (the firmament) is a solid structure 
as some teach ? A .—The firmament is a solid expanse over our heads. If it 
were not solid it would not be able to support the “water above the firmament.” 

The dome of St. Paul’s is made of solid material yet persons can walk about 
in it. And so the dome of the heavens, or the firmament, although made of 
solid matter, is concave towards us so that the stars, sun, and moon, can all 
move around and above the Earth, freely inside the firmament dome. 

Q. — Have you seen the Daily Mail for to-day, the 9th ? If so what do you 
think of the Rev. J. H. Smyth Pigolt’s claim to be the Messiah ? A.—I believe 

it not, (see Matt. xxiv. 23 and 24; Mark xiii. 21 and 22; Acts i. 11; and 
Rev. i. 7). “ This same Jesus.” “ Every- eye shall see Him.” 

Reply to Z. E. U.—Firstly : Fire is the combustion of hydrogen and oxygen, 
i.e., two properties; this is agreed to, and we should deem it a favour if either 
yourself, or any of our learned correspondents could describe the nature and 
consistency of air, as per yours and latest arrived-at scientific fiat. Secondly : 
In spite of the deeply laid schemes of Satanic diplomacy, viz. : that man’s word 
against God’s should be accepted, and false Cosmogony erected ; nevertheless, 
the Mosaic account and true order of Creation has not been lost sight of through 
the ages. But this item of truth has been upheld by varied supports, consisting 
of large and powerful communities and individuals,both notable and ignominious. 
Strange it seems that among some of the most prominent supporters in the first 
instance were the R.C. Church, Lord Bacon, and Descartes. It cannot be 
denied that the ancient R.C. Church believed in the Mosaic account of Creation 
from the fact that the decision of the Inquisition cone emned Galileo for teach¬ 
ing “that the earth moved round the sun; as such opinion was contrary to 
Scripture.” Seven years after, that is in 1632, Galileo was again cited before 
the Inquisition lor the same oft'ence, and after a trial of ten months was con¬ 
demned in June, 1633. The accounts of the nature of his punishment do not 
correspond. Let us not undervalue weight of evidence, and all helpful support 
of Truth, come from whatever source it may. But let us remember that God 
knows best which instruments to use. And let us seek Truth at all costs, even 
though it mav condemn us. 


The distances on this chart are those found by the 
modern steamship. 

Dimensions mean the compass within which the whole 
Earth lies. This dimension is much smaller than one 
would suppose. 

■' ■ ’ »**..'* ■ • 

'I he latitudes arc out as much as 30 degrees on the 
China side, and countries thought tropical are really Arctic • - 
in consequence. This has been explained in The Earth - 

Magazine for the months of March and Mav 1900 ' : V| 

- ’ ~ ■ 

The Great Secret of the Earth lies in the Gulf of Pichili ■ 4 

which is quite 30 degrees out of the Globe's latitude V i 

Rivers in the Gulf of Picluh freeze SOLID from Novem - A 

her to March This seventy of climate upsets the Globe's 
latitudes, and allows of a reasonable Ground Plan of the . ' 

Earth. ' ,y 


1 he Longitudes are fairly representative. 

.> 1 * 

Middletons attempted 


Cape Horn, 

« iv.r -y ~*M 




/TV have much pleasuie in recommending the above work. 

The booklet contains the three thousand words, and idioms, 
which are most used in ordinary conversation ; sufficient to 
enable you to,talk French all your life ; no fossil philological 
peculiarities, but French as it is actually spoken in France.. 
Grammar underlies each group of examples, and we think 
this a cleverly condensed method of teaching the French 


The Author of French in Three Months also gives Lessons 
in Conversational French to adults, at 




Friends of the Ed. of this Magazine can testify to his ability 
aud agreeable way of teaching. 

Bryn Aber College and Home School 


Bryn Aber, Sea Road, Boscombe. 

Miss (JORDON {of mauv years’ practical experience in tuition) receives a 
.iniited number of young ladies to board and educate. The situation of her house 
is healthy and pleasant, being only '2. minutes’ walk from the sea, well sheltered 
bv pines ; with perfect sanila ion, warm and comfortable carpeted bed and clsss 
rooms. Special facilities for acquiring languages, the best foreign governesses 
residing in the house, and French and German being constantly spoken. 

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co., 


22, Budge Row, Cannon Street, 


Price of Appliances £1 Is., £2 2s., & £3 3s. 

Instalments may be arranged. 


Vol. 111 . Nos. 29 & 30. 


Sitting on tiii-; Flat Earth ! 

(1 continued from p. 42.) 

Part II. 

Our antipodean and astronomical critic is not any more 
fortunate in his assertions respecting us Zetetics than he is 
in his astronomical theories. He writes in a loose flippant 
manner, asserting, because of his " overhead ” theory, that 
I have “not the slightest idea of modern theories." This 
proves his ignorance of our literature. As a matter of fact, 
nearly ten years ago, I publicly replied to the same objections, 
as may be seen in l he. Earth (not a globe) Rcincw for Julv, 
1893, p. 21, under the heading “ Our Critics.” Owing to 
failing health 1 had to give up the editorship of this paper ; 
and as this number is now of print, and the subject of some 
importance, 1 will quote, for the benefit,of the readers <f 
The Earth , from the reply then given. 

“ The pamphlet we lately published, entitled The Midnight 
Sun, the latter part of which is found in the July number 
of the Earth Review, 1893, has fallen like a bomb into the 
camp of the enemy, and created some consternation amongst 
our opponents. A few arc trying to show that our conclu¬ 
sions are premature, and our diagrams, especially Diagram 
No. i, not correct. Fair controversy will do good. Anony¬ 
mous c ^respondents we shall not notice ; but the criticism 
of one or two who have honestly sent their names we shah 
reply to. Our only object is truth. But friends and foes 
should remember that our means are limited. We will take 
our correspondent C. H. as a typical objector, as his criticisms 
approach nearest to those of a “ scientific ” character. 

Referring to diagram I, he says:—“The sun should be 
overhead at the point F, but it is not. It ought to be on a 
prolongation of the line E F not G F.’ 

As this is the chief objection we will take up this point 
first, and elucidate it by reference to Diagram 4. It is thought 
that the sun ought to be placed at or beyond S in a line 

I 20 



A Fine Experiment in the Pantheon. 

To the Editor.-The Anglo-Saxon Press, on the 23 rd Oetober coUectwely 
tell us, that a great pendulum hung from the top of the Pantheon y 
Astronomical Society of France, to give occular demonstration by itsoscilla- 
tions of the rotation of the globe, was yesterday set in mn««nent 
ural ceremony, presided over by M. Chaumie, Minister of Public Instruction 
The pendulum consisted of a ball, weighing about sixty pounds attached t 
a wire about seventy yards long, and we are told by modern ast,‘ 
the experiment conclusively proved, against the testimony o 
observation, the rotation of the earth. 

But how can the motion of a pendulum suspended from the top of the Pan¬ 
theon, when the Pantheon and the pendulum, are both attached to 
a part of the earth, prove the earth’s rotation? The experiment may 1there_o 
be classed with the common negations of nescience, and not as a demonstrated 
fact, in the realms of true scientific induction from observed naturalfrom the 
Besides we all of us know, that when our modern balloons ascend from the 
earth into’the surrounding atmosphere, they all, after being one ° r 
in the air, return to precisely the same spot from which they began their ^em, 
allowing of course for the active movement of the atmosphere a: the time ot 
their ascent. And as the propelling force of light activdy moves the Radto^ 
meter when hermetically sealed in a glass globe, the same force of light is a 
sufficient scientific explanation of the comparatively inactive motion ol the 
pendulum in the Pantheon at Paris. mvinSflN 

October 23. d, 1902. WM - M ‘ DAVIDSON. 


earth theorv ” ? “The plane earth theory ” is founded upon the fact that water 
is level • and one fact must agree with another fact. One fact cannot disprove 
another fact. It may present a difficulty in the explanation or in the harmon¬ 
izing of the two facts. This is quite another matter underlying the question 
of distance, it is the question of “ degrees ” not the shape of the Earth. And 
underlying the question of “degrees” is the question of star motions, and the 

“1?“ for us S to examine these questions, and see if popular conclusions thereon 
are correct; and not rush in the face of the fact that water is evel and the 
earth therefore a plane. Mr. Middleton’s map of distances may throw light on 
this subject. As to the midnight Sun being seen south by Borchgevink, it may 
or it may not be a fact ; the evidence does not seem very clear. Many Zetetics 
think it is not true, but a few, like “ Zetetes,” think it is possibly true, but 
that if true it does not alter the fact that wat.r is Level. 

I be<r to refer vou to the article by “Zetetes, m The Earth tax April and 
May 1902, entitled The Unknown South. The same writer has also shown 
that if the midnight sun be seen in the south it is inconsistent with the globular 
theory If Mr. G. A. will write an article, trying to prove the Earth is a globe, 
and basing his proofs upon southern phenomena, we will insert it in J he 
Earth , when no doubt some of our readers will reply to it. 

jj B_The Bible and the globular theorv cannot both be true . One must 

fall !—’Ed. T. E. 

the earth. 

Vol - IIL Nos. 31 & 32. 



It is perhaps too much to expect a novelist to be a true 
scientist, especially when so many so-called scientists write 
like ordinary novelists. 

As we have often seen, and as it has often been shown in 
the pages of The Earth , astronomers draw largely upon the 
imagination. "I hey teach we are living on an imaginary 
globe rotating on an imaginary axis, and whirling through 
space in some imaginary orbit, pulled about by an imagin¬ 
ary force called gravitation. So that when so-called scientists 
write in this imaginary strain we cannot expect to find writers 
of Action to be over exact in their references to the Creation 
of bod the shape of the world, or the form of the Universe 
We have been led into this strain of thought by reading 
the first chapter in a modern novel, entitled Temporal 
Power, by Marie Corelli. As to the general merits or de¬ 
merits of the volume we do not now propose to discuss them ■ 
but we were struck wiith the inconsistency of the writer' 
who opens her book with quotations from the Scriptures’ 
evidently in good faith, and yet she immediately takes the 
trouble to cast a slur upon the truth of those Scriptures as 
regards them teaching about the Creation of the world. 

That it may be seen we do not misrepresent her we will 
quote from her opening chapter. Under the heading “ A 
King s I leasaunce,’’ she writes : 

earth ’" S ° W f are l°' d ’ ‘ God mac1e the h «*«n* and the 

earth The statement simple and terse; it is evidently intended to 

to ffirb d e C ither rehen c Ve ' IU decisive ’ almost abru P l tone would seem 
“ eitd " question or argument. The old-world narrator of the 
u dime event thus briefly chronicled was a poet of no mean quality though 
moved by the natural conceit of man to give undue importance to "he 

ht exoTains ‘°Co, .f? niCah ?. habita ‘ io "- The perfect confidence with which 
e explains God as making ‘two lights, the greater light to rule 

thos*'’ t0 , rU ‘ e , the night ’’ is touching to tL vlrget 

pathos. And the additional remark which he threw in, as it were casually, 



‘ He made the stars also,’ cannot but move us to admiration. How 
childlike the simplicity of the soul which could so venture to deal with 
the inexplicable and tremendous problem of the universe ! How self- 
centred ; and sure the faith which could so arrange the work of Infinite 
and Eternal forces to suit its own limited intelligence.” 

Evidently the authoress does not believe in the beginning 
of this world such as is revealed in the Bible ; a book which 
has outlived thousands of novels or mere works of fiction, 
and which seems destined to outlive as many more, including 
even those of the writer under consideration. 

But as it is the fashion at this period of the world’s history 
to ignore Bible teaching by those who are ignorant of the 
elements contained in it, which, if understood, would fully 
justify its claims, we should not be surprised if Marie Corelli 
has imbibed the general scepticism regarding the Creation 
of the world by a Personal Creator, as recorded in the first 
chapter of Genesis by Moses the man of God. 

But we must remember that the Lord Jesus fully endorses 
the teachings of Moses, and furthermore affirmed that unless 
we believe the writings of Moses we cannot believe His own 
words (John v. 41). We may disbelieve the words of Jesus 
as well as the writings of Moses if we are so conceited as to 
imagine we are enlightened enough to do so ; but it is utterly 
inconsistent to profess to believe the teachings of Jesus 
while discrediting the writings of Moses. Scepticism and 
consistency don’t seem to fraternize well together. In fact 
writers of fiction, and astronomers, ought to be consistent in 
their scepticism when they reject the inspired records. 

According to such writers Moses, or whoever wrote the 
Book of Genesis, is simply “ an old world narrator,” and a 
“ poet of no mean order,” writing of course with a poet’s 
license about a “ sublime event.” But if he really wrote 
about a “ sublime event,” then he was more than a good 
poet; he was a “narrator” of an actual event, an event 
which can be traced back from the present position and 
known motions of the heavenly bodies themselves. 

Yet to a writer of fiction the first chapter of Genesis is 
merely a “so we are told ” kind of story, written by a man 
who was moved simply by the “ natural conceit of men ” to 
think this world was of sufficient importance for God to make 
for it “ two great lights.” Lights merely intended to give 
light upon the earth. 



It is evidently nothing to such a writer that an inspired 
apostle declared that “ prophecy came not in old time by 
the will of man ; but holy men of God spake as they were 
moved by the Holy Spirit.” It is a sorry statement to say 
that a man moved by God’s Holy Spirit was moved merely 
by “the natural conceit of men.” (2 Pet. i. 21). But it is 
evidently unknown to such a writer that God Himself spake 
on Sinai, saying : “ Lor in six days Jehovah made heaven 
and earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested the 
seventh day, wherefore Jehovah blessed the Sabbath Day 
and hallowed it.”— Ex. xx. 11. But could we be surprised 
at this when she speaks of God as simply some “ Everlasting 
Power of goodness and beauty called by that name ” ? 

Yet we are inclined to ask, does power and goodness exist 
in anything but a personal being? Did “goodness ” intell¬ 
igently directed ever exist in mere atoms, or in the “mighty 
atom ” from which this world is supposed to have originally 
sprung? All such mighty atoms that M. C. wrote in one 
of her former novels. 

It is not long since we read of a young man in Somerset, 
the son of a clergyman, who after reading a novel entitled 
The Mighty Atom, went and did the same as one of the 
characters described in that book. The former had been 
lent to the young man by the Rector of M—. Although 
his mother objected, the very evening before his death he 
had been reading this book, by the same author as the one 
now under consideration. The young man had also imbibed 
certain sacerdotal teaching, which played with depraved force 
upon his mind so when his body was discovered, he was 
found dressed in a cassock which had belonged to his late 
father, with a “ cross ” attached to one of its loops, and 
hanging from a beam in his bedroom quite dead. 

In the report of his death, which is before us, it is said 
that the coroner read a passage from The Mighty Atom , 
which describes the suicide of one of the characters by a 
similar means to that of the deceased. Mr. G. had remarked 
to his mother about the end of the lad in the novel before 
he retired on the night of his death. 

However this may be, the writer of these works of fiction 
seems to make very light of suicide, for in the work now 
under criticism, she makes more than one of her heroes end 
his life in this criminal manner. We cannot help noticing 



how different was Paul’s advice to the Phillipian jailer : 

“ Do thyself no harm —by which advice he acted, living 
always to be of use to his fellow men. But then Paul and 
the jailer believed in a personal God who made the world 
and all that therein is. 

If we are all nothing more than the descendants of a 
“ mighty atom,” or any number of atoms fortuitously drawn 
together by the so-called laws of attraction and gravitation, 
why, what does it matter which way we go out of the world ? 
We do not assert that the writer of these fictions says that 
it does not matter ; but the evident tendency of such books 
is to make light of self-murder, and even glorify the crime 
by placing a sort of heroic mantle over the heroes who aie 
represented as committing it. 

But coming back to the question of Creation. W e may 
say that we Zetetics prefer what she calls “ the childlike 
simplicity of soul,” which takes the Word of God before the 
word of man, and believes in a personal Creator who “ in 
six days made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in 
them is.” The stars also, as lights, and nothing more than 
lights, to give light upon this only world. 

Speaking personally, we have suffered pain through Marie 
Corelli’s novels, because we have feared their evil trend 
might sow poison in the minds of those we deeply desire 
shall only cultivate the love of truth. 

We regard all M. C.'s novels, as far as we have read 
them, as having an evil tendency in more ways than one, 
but we know more of the book quoted in this article, -and 
The Sorrows of Satan than any others. These two, at least, 
are decidedly calculated to sow entirely unscriptural and false 
ideas of a pernicious nature ; which are more particularly 
liable to affect the young and the simple minded, because 
the style of writing and the nature of the errors introduced 
are more fascinating and alluring to the unwary-. 

Nevertheless, it seems to us that Marie Corelli, herself, 
would be a bright light on the earth could she be led by 
God’s Spirit, through Jesus our dear Lord, to use her ability- 
in the cause of Righteousness and Truth, and in humble 
obedience to the Will of the Creator. Otherwise she will 
have misused her talent. The legend of a noted writei rises 
before us :—“ Fashola lived, and died, a king of men devoid 



of pride, yet much beloved ! Alas ! his nature good had one 
restriction, or contradiction—he wrote much fiction ! The 
aged, and the child, he most beguiled ! his own child died, 
a suicide and, too, his fiction deep made spirits weep and 
shriek, and moan, and groan. As midnight rang, this dirge 
they sang, when man is said to he quite dead , his evil 
lives ,'—so legend gives.” 

Yes, truly “ the evil that men do lives after them,” it there¬ 
fore behoves writers of fiction to remember this. Whether 
such be writers of prose, or poetry—and this more particu¬ 
larly for the sakes of the young. 

All young people (of botk sexes) should cultivate a 
taste for true literature—both prose and poetry. And when 
I say “ poetry I mean true poetry, i.e., poetry containing 
Tiuth. For true poetry is ennobling. It raises the thoughts 
above things which are merely mundane. The Holy Script¬ 
ures afford evidence in themselves that the Creator deemed 
poetry to be an energizing and vitalizing element or princi¬ 
ple in our spiritual education. 

Our Lord s miracles, and teaching, and life are the essence 
of poetry—-Divine poetry. The Bible is full of poetry ; the 
Psalms are charged with the highest poetic vein—and there 
is nothing to be compared to them for poetic grandeur, 
Truth, and loftiness of thought. Yet many people run off 
with the idea that poetry must necessarily contain a fictitious 
vein, and therefore they regard teaching expressed in poetic 
language in the Bible as unreliable. But this is a fallacious 
idea, as we may perceive even from a logical standpoint. 

The Apostle Paul testified to the fact that the Athenian 
poets were vessels of truth. 

A noted writer has remarked that “ the genius of Hebrew 
admits of no poet’s license,” and we assert most assuredly 
that the inspired genius of Holy Writ, from Genesis to 
Revelations, admits of no untrue license ; and our pray-er is 
ever to be prepared with God s help to defend the veracity 
of the Bible at all costs. 

The Holy Scriptures contain evidence within themselves 
that they are the record of the expressed Will of God, and 
that they are charged with supernatural Spirit, Power, and 
Truth is proven not only on experimental, observational, 
and realistic lines, but through the evidence of the facts of 


I 26 

Nature, and personal observation and experience. For “ He 
that believeth hath a witness within himself.” 

Referring in a personal sense once more to fiction, I 
feel compelled to openly confess that when it was stated 
in The Protestant Standard , quite recently, that I ‘‘ also 
was a novelist,” I was not proud of that kindly meant puff 
up. And I am led now to state that the only story I 
ever wrote, viz : Adrian Galilio, was written because I was 
requested to do so, and I was promised considerable finan¬ 
cial gain if I would produce a story. Since then I have 
received earnest requests to write more stories—and the 
publication secured—but I do not intend to do so. The 
works were to be devoid of either religion, theology, science, 
astronomy, or astrology ; but I was asked to urge the neces¬ 
sary reformation of present laws, which unjustly inflict the 
consequences of parental sin upon their innocent offspring, 
who not only suffer substantial loss, but humiliation and 
degradation to their conscious minds and souls. Although 
men and women beget bodily offspring they do not beget 
the intelligent soul which inhabits those bodies. 1 his is an 
indisputable point, for murderers and others of the vilest 
character have been the parents of saints, and visa versa; 
therefore evil doers should suffer for their transgressions, 
and they alone. 

I am thankful, however, that my one story was written with 
a purpose, and it has not failed as it has been the means 
of leading some into lines of truth—and they have accepted 
the same through my story’s instrumentality. 

Let us therefore beware of spending ourselves and our 
money for “ that which is not bread,” and our “ labour for that 
which satisfieth not.” But rather let us become wedded to 
the truth in a deeper sense, day by day, then shall our soul 
delight itself in fatness and in true freedom—Freedom from 
sin’s snare, and death’s sting. 

“ And the truth shall make you free.” 

(.rather the Truth unto thy heart. 

Gather it night and morn, 

Gather it gently, and crush it not, 

As a ilovver of tender form. 

And wherever thou see’st it springing forth, 
Let it adorn. 




" r 

Gather the Truth, its lovely leaves 
Of heavenly tint and hue, 

If placed with care around thy brow, 
will lend thee beauty true. 

Its blossoms withstand the heat of day 
By Morning Dew. 

Gather the Truth—before it bow, 

Where’er its source I pray ; 

Gather the ozone fragrance now 
From its pure and heavenly ray. 

Seek it wherever the Truth allow', 

And seek alway. 

Gather the Truth—Jehovah’s Words, 

Spoken on Sinai ; 

Gather with care and ignore them not, 

Nor pander unto a lie ! 

Christ Jesus e’er kept His Father's Word, 

And we should try. 

God’s pardoning Mercy comes through Christ, 

His blood can sin atone, 

And we behold Creation’s Works 
As by His Sabbath shown. 

Gather the Truth in Christ, our Life, 

In Him alone. 

E. A. M. B. 


'1 he Daily Mail of December 23rd, 1902, contains a re¬ 
presentation of Mr. Marconi’s telegraphic installation at 
Cape Breton Island, Nova Scotia—and also at Poldhu, 
Cornwall, ISngland. 

I 2o 


This sketch, as published in the newspapet, represents 
Mr. Marconi’s apparatus as set up on the flat earth, with 
its huge towers parallel to each other, on each side of the 
ocean, whilst the ocean itself is represented by the usual 
curvature of the globe ! 

Anything more grotesque in the way of drawing it would 
be^difficult to conceive, and it is surely a fair criticism to say 
that the artist must have both felt and known that the de¬ 
sign was totally false in all its bearings and future possible 
results ! 

Why, then, is a drawing of this nature published to the 
world at large, and in an English daily newspaper ? 

Mr. Marconi’s towers are said to be 215 feet high, and 
this altitude would certainly be very considerable on a flat 
earth, and with a view that the electric message might then 
pass safely over the intervening space without being in¬ 
fluenced by the surface of the ocean, or by vessels which 
might happen to pass beneath the line of electricity. 

The distance between the two stations is given as 2,270 
nautical miles ; but this, again, is much better stated in its 
truer character of statute miles—in that all miles on maps 
and in atlasses are invariably statute miles, and neither 
nautical nor that other fallacy called geographical miles— 
and this fact of all miles in maps being statute miles is of 
itself one of the great proofs that the earth is flat, and that 
map makers recognize that such is the case. 

The distance then between the two stations may be safely 
computed as 2,620 statute miles, but the ocean being drawn 
as if curved so this curvature will represent an immense 
height of water as rising between the two stations, and this 
height will amount to not less than 216 statute miles ; and in 
the face of this immense tower of water we are actually ex¬ 
pected to believe that Mr. Marconi’s parallel towers 215 feet 
high are sufficiently lofty to transmit a message over an 
eminence of 216 miles, and situated just half-way between 
his towers of such comparatively trifling elevation. 

The towers, however, as drawn in the Daily Mail , together 
with a projecting staff—which may be meant as a flag-staff 
—are really drawn to be equal in height to the curvature 
of the ocean between ! Therefore Marconi’s towers should 
each be 216 miles in height; and I ask, is the Professor 
prepared for this costly' installation, and one which it is im¬ 
possible to set up ? 


1 29 

To return once again to the distance of 2,620 statute 
miles, and recording the elevation of curvature at Cape 
Breton itself, instead of half way between the stations, I 
find that the tower at Cape Breton should be 866 miles below 
the tower at Cornwall, when the latter position on the globe 
is kept—top up. And the position at Cornwall would be, in 
its turn, 866 miles below that at Cape Breton, when the latter 
station is kept top up on the globe. 

And yet we are expected to believe that Mr. Marconi’s 
towers, each of an elevation of only 215 feet, are equal to 
the occasion of telegraphing, up hill in the one case, over 
a height of 866 miles ; and also, as possibly, down hill in 
the other case—and round a corner to a drop of 866 miles. 

Really, I may, well ask, what are Mr. Marconi’s towers 
for ? Why not keep the apparatus flush on the ground at 
once ? Naturally the towers are imperative, and that is why 
they' are built ; and they prove, of course, that the earth is 
flat between the two stations, and throughout the distance 
of the 2,620 miles; and that neither the eminence of 216 
miles of water, as in the centre, nor the discrepancy 
of levels, amounting to 866 miles in the whole distance and 
at either end, has any actual and veritable existence whatever. 

And now, to return to the diagram once again, the towers 
on either side are shown to be parallel to each other, but 
instead of this upright position each tower should be at a 
smart angle to the other ; for instance the one in Cornwall 
should lean to the right, whilst that at Cape Breton should 
lean to the left— outwards and away from each other. 

This angular position of the towers is imperative on a 
globular diagram representing part of a globular earth, and 
of course all the impracticable difficulties hitherto exposed 
would become even more impracticable than before, and 
with the further effect that the message from the one tower 
would have no tendency to pass in the desired direction to 
the other tower, but would have a direct propensity to fly 
ofl into space and be hopelessly resolved, by the revolving 
globe, into nothingness, or electric force of no possible use 
for the purpose of telegraphy of the wireless order. 

Mr. Marconi might be a thunder maker, but not a tele¬ 
graphist. This clever electrician has furnished one of the 
strongest proofs that the earth is flat, and his system of 
wireless telegraphy', with its graphic parallel towers will no 




doubt be an abiding feature and an encouraging proof that 
the earth is not the globe it has been thought to be, and is, 
in addition, stationary ; without which latter state of repose 
and quietude it would indeed be difficult to perceive how 
wireless messages can or could be sent—especially over long 

The very long distances over which wireless messages have 
been sent are also standing and most convincing proofs that 
the earth is a stationary and extended plane, the ground 
plan of which has a general tendency to flatness, which fact 
is being widely accepted as the true shape of the earth and 
is becoming more and more certified. 



The latter day educational curriculum of our English and 
Scottish Universities must be held responsible for the 
opinions enunciated by Mr. I. N. Me Lean. And I must be 
permitted to adhere to the opinion that the pendulum ex¬ 
periment, whether performed in the Pantheon at Rome; 
in the Science Museum at South Kensington, or in the 
Glasgow Cathedral, prove nothing but the pendulum’s 
own motion, and not the rotation of the earth, and, therefore, 
these scientific experiments have to be classed with the 
common negations of nescience. 

The erroneous opinions of ancient and modern astrono¬ 
mers tell us that the revolution of the earth in its annual 
orbit round the sun has the effect of causing the latter body 
seemingly to describe a complete revolution among the 
stars in the course of the year. If the plane, say our astron¬ 
omers, of the apparent path had been parallel to the earth’s 
equator, the days and nights would be equal all over the 
globe, and each place on the earth would have one constant 
season, the character of which would depend upon its geo¬ 
graphical latitude. Instead of this coincidence of planes, 
the equator and ecliptic are mutually inclined to each other 
at 23! degrees; consequently the sun is alternately seen 
above and below the equator by this amount, causing the 



phenomena of summer and winter ; giving long days and 
summer to the northern hemisphere when the sun is north 
of the equator, and short days and winter when south of it. 

And all this astronomical nescience is, as cause and effect, 
attributed to the revolution of the earth in its annual orbit 
round the sun, and not to the annual revolution of the sun 
around its own celestial orbit in the heavens, which we now 
scientifically propose to demonstrate from the reliable cre- 
denda of natural phenomena. 

The great orb of light is visible, during the whole period 
of 24 hours, at the summer solstice, at the North Pole, or 
centre, and at the winter solstice it recedes southwards. 
And, therefore, the earth does not revolve, as universally 
proclaimed and affirmed by the revolution hypothesis, around 
the sun, or the sun around the earth, but around its own 
circular, or elliptical orbit in the heavens. 

The sun, on December 31st, our shortest dajq was at its 
extreme South.* From this position, since the creation of the 
world, the sun has annually advanced, cycle upon cycle, or 
ellipse upon ellipse, until it reaches the North pole on June 
21st, our longest day, when the great orb of light will again 
return, by a similar process of retraction, to South regions. 

It is, therefore, to the annual revolution of the sun around 
its own eliptical orbit in the heavens, that we are indebted 
for the varied seasons of the solar year, for spring, summer, 
autumn, and winter, and not, as now taught in the curricu¬ 
lum of our English and Scottish universities, to the revolu¬ 
tion of the earth around the sun. 



Many educated people are aware that Mr. Marconi, the 
ingenious telegraphist, has fitted up extensive operating 
stations, which are 2,500 miles apart, at Poldu in Cornwall 

*Our esteemed friend, Mr. Fred. B. Hughes, of Woodv-ille, South Australia, 
writing on Dec. 9th, 1902, says, “Our longest day here will be on Sunday, 28th 
Dec... when the sun rises at 5.4 a.m. and sets at 7.82 p.m.” 


I 32 

and Glace Bay, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia, between which 
messages are expected to be exchanged ; but many perhaps 
did not see, or perhaps critically view, the contents of a 
weekly paper called The Sphere , dated November 22nd, 
1902, in which on pp. 178-9, are some very curious diagrams, 
one of which shows a segment of a circle of about 25,000 
miles, with accessories. 

The operating towers, which in reality are only 200 feet 
high, by comparison with the 2,500 mile curve, are repre¬ 
sented as being about 90 miles each in height,—which is 
rather good for a leaning tower. Two ships are also shown 
on the wonderful curve, which in comparison cannot be less 
than 50 miles each in length,—which is likewise good for a 
vessel with any number of funnels. 

Regarding the wonderful curve, that is shown as being 
made up in the deepest part of a stupendous mountain of 
water, over 120 miles high, so that a 32-h.p. “Hornsby” 
oil engine, with Mather & Platt's dynamos, do not appear 
unnecessarily powerful to project the current over such an 
immense impediment. 

Lastly, there are dashes shown to represent the electric 
current, which is being projected from the 90-mile high 
towers ; some of these very wonderful current dashes, in 
comparison with the rest of the misleading monstrosity, are 
shown as flying hundreds of miles high, and certainly far 
from the influence of Mr. Marconi's apparatus. 

Altogether, The Sphere people have published to the 
world, through their highly imaginative artist, Percy Home, 
some most misleading illustrations for future generations to 
laugh and deride at. 

We cannot for a moment think that Mr. Marconi would in 

any way endorse such foolish diagrams, which are put before 
the public, presumably to educate them-IN IGNOR¬ 


[/« reference to the above article , as also to that of Mr. 
Middleton (see p. 12J), we must point out that even were the 
world a globe BOTH “ The Sphere" and the “ Daily Mail” 
are wrong in their illustrations ; both think anything is good 
enough for the British Public to swallow , provided it only be 
dubbed SCIENCE.— Ed.] 




Since our last issue the Ed. has given lectures at the 
Shire Hall, Holt, Norfolk, on January 15th, 1903, for the 
Holt Mutual Improvement Society ; at the Eccleston Hall, 
Berwick Street, London, on January 15th, for the Eccleston 
Social and Literary Society ; and at the Shire Hall, Chelms¬ 
ford, on January 20th. Also at Kingston, and Hampton 

These meetings were more than well attended, and the 
reports are far too numerous and lengthy to reprint, as many 
pages would be required to reproduce all that appeared in 
the daily and weekly papers. The following are from letters 
received from some of the gentlemen who reported at the 
different meetings. 

“ I am interested in the subject and should be pleased 
if you would forward me literature bearing upon the same.” 

“ I perceived that many of your points in argument 
were solid, and unanswerable.” 

“ Kindly send me The Earth regularly.” 

“Your lengthy lecture will certainly lead, in my opin¬ 
ion, to a better study of the Scriptures, and if it does this 
it will not have been given in vain.” 

The London Morning Leader makes reference to the above. 
The following is one paragraph taken from the “ Sub Rosa ” 
column :— 

“ Nothing will induce me to oppose so effective an 
alliance as Moses and Lady Blount. I have always re¬ 
garded Moses as a very distinguished man—not perfect 
perhaps, but distinctly superior to Aaron. And as to Lady 
Blount her sex and her title claim and receive my respect. 
If, therefore, these two agree on this point I do not mind 
owning that I shall in future regard the earth as a little 
more flat and a little less globular than I did before. More¬ 
over, Lady Blount is the first teacher, so far as I am aware, 
to settle that matter about what it is that keeps the sea 
trom spilling. Here is a valuable passage from the lecture : 
‘ She believed and the pianists hold that the earth and sea 





are extended planes on which men and ships are securely 
kept by great and permanent mountains of ice which, as 
a demonstrated fact, surround the world on which we live 
and move and have our being.’ Seeing that we have such 
an ice surrounding, we ought to be satisfied. The whole 
world is a huge cold storage affair, and it is to be hoped 
that Mother Earth will never have to say, “ I thawed so,” 
or there will be a terrible mess.” 

We had intended to refrain from quoting other matter 
from the same source, as it contains a touch of vulgarity, but 
as we perceive that our esteemed correspondent, Mr. Xavier 
Field, makes reference to it, we give it, as follows : 

“The other day I mourned that Ebenezer Breach had 
left no successor to bear aloft the banner of the Flat School 
of Philosophy—or perhaps I should say the School of Flat 
Philosophy. I now find I was wrong, for a report of a 
lecture delivered to the Holt Mutual Improvement Society, 
shows that she has stepped into the breach (and I here 
request readers to abstain from sending jokes about the 
plural form ot the word.) Lady Blount is quite sound in 
the faith, and she sticks to Moses as adhesively as did 
Ebenezer. I have long since announced that I leave the 
matter an open question, my own view being that the 
world is not so flat as some suppose, nor as globular as 
others declare.” 

Regarding the Southern Circumference, an esteemed cor¬ 
respondent writes as follows : 

“ A correspondent says that it has been proved that 
longitudes narrow towards the South. I ask, how and 
when was it proved , and has the late expedition proved 
it ? The earth may still be flat either way. It will not 
make a globe of it, though the answer is MOST im¬ 
portant. I favour the smaller South Antarctic region— 
about 4,000 miles round, commonly called a South Pole, 
—a SMALL Antarctic region in preference to an outside 
ring of ice, which latter will still be there , but further 


Under the above heading, S.L.H., of the Morning Leader , 
has been favouring his readers with a “ skit” on our teach¬ 
ing anent the Plane Earth. The column we allude to is not 
written for those who take life seriously, and S.L.H. being 
the “ funny man ” of the staff is nothing unless jocular. 
Therefore, to use the words of a somewhat gruesome quot¬ 
ation, if possible he would 

“ Raise a laugh under the ribs of death.” 

By this we mean that nothing is too serious or sacred for 
this facile writer to offer some punningly satirical remarks 
upon. He means no spite towards anyone ; but it is his 
business to be humorous, and his Morning Leader column 
must be filled with jokelets—“ the more the merrier” ; yet 
he must not run counter to accepted orthodox theories. 
Consequently, although he has a fine field for some genuine 
wit upon the absurd deductions of orthodox astronomers, 
who, whilst admitting that we cannot travel in a railway train 
60 miles an hour and believe that the train is not moving, 
tell us that Mother Earth is whizzing through space at the 
rate of 65,000 miles an hour, besides doing a daily “turn 
over” (an amazing acrobatic feat); but as we intimated 
before, it is S.L.H.’s business to go with the times, and, if 
necessary to throw overboard the Bible, which says : “ Thou, 
Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the 
earth ” ( Heb. i. 10) ; “The world also is established that it 
cannot be moved ” ( Ps . xci. 1, xcvi. 10). 

S.L.H. admits that Lady Blount is “quite sound in the 
faith.” In the words of Shakespeare we say: “For this 
relief much thanks.” S.L.H. goes on to say that Lady 
Blount “ sticks to Moses as adhesively as did Ebenezer” 
(Breach) ; but why drag in Mr. Breach, who was a good man 
— “that, and nothing more” ? It is true that Mr. Breach 
so recognized the truths proclaimed by Lady Blount as to 
frame her ladyship’s letters in gold ; but he was one of the 
class of individuals who would be safe as scholars though 
apt to make grotesque blunders as teachers, and, through 
lack of educational and mental training are liable to be made 


tools of in the hands of those who wish to bring P'ane Earth 
truths into ridicule. Mr. Breach meant no ham, him self mt 
his mental calibre was such that he was unwittingly led away 
by those who desired to make the Zetetic Cosmogony and 
Plane Earth truths a laughing stock , the 

However, accepting and acting on the prin p 
weakest link of a chain is the strongest °“ r PP . 

Jf-WS p Pb were^not 

dure, to say the least, is not “ fair fighting. accept in 

What our God-given senses reveal to P 

preference to theories opposed to common sense, and t 
God’s Word, which says : “ The pillars of he eartfc are_ the 
Lord’s, and He hath set the world upon them 0 f 
“ He hath founded the earth upon her 

be removed ” (ft. civ. S ) 5 “ He hath founded upon the 
spas and established it upon the floods (1 s. xxiv. -) , 

so-called modern scientists and globular astronomers comra^ 

heim? our most prominent defender , a 

remind the writer in the Morning Leader that, 1 we ™ f * he 
not, they have a lady on their staff; at any ri *5 
leading daily papers requisition the services of ladies. 
National Press Agency, the London Press,, 5 ™^ 'hSe 
Central News, the Press Association, and ’ jn thig 

ladies for their most valued contributors , 
respect, S.L.H., is in the position of being 

“ Hoist with his own petard.” 

To proceed further would be to “ slaughter the s ' ain Q ” ^ 
to use a rather bucolic expression, “ there is l P 

S, ’woolGr a ee„ d N kS " XAVIER FIELD. 




In the paper entitled Past and. Future we notice, in the 
number for December, 1902, an article headed A Jewel 
World. The editor of the paper opens with a statement 
which we think he cannot prove. He says : “ there are 
more worlds than one.” He goes further and says : that 
“God has made” all these worlds to display His glorious 

We should like to know from whence the editor obtained 
his information. He professes to believe the Bible ; but the 
Bible gives no account of anj' other world than this which 
we inhabit. Where then does he get his information ? 

Not from the Bible, but from the opinions and speculations 
of the astronomers. On p. 19 of the same number he says : 
“ some people discredit the immense distance and magnitude 
of the celestial orbs.” Now as Zetetics are the people who 
discredit these “ immense distances” the reference must be 
to us. VVe should like to ask the writer for his proof— 
either that the stars are worlds, or that they are situated at 
the “ immense distances ” assigned by the astronomers. 

He offers no proof of star distances, and only a very flimsy 
one of the distance of the moon. He asserts that the moon 
must be 236,267 miles away from the earth ; and says, “ were 
the moon not so distant it would not be seen eclipsed on 
the same night by persons living all over the same hemis¬ 

We are not prepared to admit that they do see every 
partial eclipse which takes place ; for some eclipses are in¬ 
visible in this country while visible elsewhere. So there 
goes assumption number two. 

Then we have no proof that a total eclipse seen over half 
the surface of the earth “ would not be seen ” unless the 
moon were that distance away from us, to say nothing of 
the exact number of miles given. So here goes assumption 
number three. 

Yet, after these three assumptions, we are further told : 
“ this fact also assists us to judge of it (the moon’s) size.” 
But if the distance be not a fact, how can the assumed dis¬ 
tance assist us to judge of the size of the moon, unless we 
judge distance by the size, and size by the distance? So 
here goes assumption number four. 


I 3 S 

We are assuredly informed, if the diameter of the moon 
was less than 2,160 miles, as stated, the moon would not 
appear equally large to us as it does at the same time to the 
residents of South Australia. We may, therefore, be satis¬ 
fied with the astronomical measurements of the distances of 
the moon, and its size, and can use them as our standard 
yard measure.” 

But we Zetetics are not satisfied with astronomical meas¬ 
urements. There is not one of these measurements of the 
distances of celestial objects that is not primarilly based 
upon the assumption that the earth is a rotating globe. 
And we deny this fundamental assumption, and have clearly 
and repeatedly shown its baseless character. Hence 
the dissatisfaction of Zetetics with the measurements of star 
distances, and the distances of the sun and moon at present 
in vogue. This distances have been altered time after time 
to suit the ever shifting requirements of hypothesis of modern 

If we want a pronounsive knowledge of God, or His star 
strewn dominions we must not begin by contradicting the 
revelation which God has given us through the prophets unto 
Israel of His great Creative Works. Now God says that the 
sun and moon, “ and the stars also,” were made on the fourth 
day of Creation week. 

There is one statement in the paragraph under consider¬ 
ation which we endorse. The statement is made that the 
stars “ do not travel round the sun,” and that they are “mere 
points of light.” How then can they be worlds, when no 
telescope ever invented by men can make of them more than 
“mere points of light” ? This fact proves unmistakeably 
the truth of Gen. i., where God says that they are merely 
“lights” intended to “give light” upon the earth.” And 
it “was so.” And it is so ; and no man in the world can 
prove it otherwise. 

Let us give up these vain speculations, and learn to take 
God at His Word ; or else be consistent in our unbelief and 
give up the Bible altogether. 

The infidel who rejects the Bible in toto is more consis¬ 
tent than the professing Christian who accepts so-called 
“ scientific ” teachings in preference to the Bible’s inspired 

With respect to star motions we quite agree that the stars 



do not revolve around the sun. They all revolve around 
and above the earth. The fixed stars revolve a little faster 
than the sun, which therefore loses one revolution in a year. 
This marks the solar year ; and together with the fact that 
the sun moves in a spiral orbit, shows the reason why the 
sun is found in the different signs of the Zodiac during the 
twelve months of the year. The sun is left behind by the 
stars 30° each month. The stars move in circular orbits 
around and above the earth, and the sun, moon, and planets 
in spiral or nearly circular orbits alternately contracting 
and expanding from a mean or middle circle called the 
equinoctial or celestial equator. So that we agree with the 
editor of Past and Future that the stars “ do not revolve 
around the sun,” but as “ lights ” merely revolve around and 
above the only earth, or world, which God intended them to 

Against the writer’s general chronology we have not a 
word to say. He is doing good work, which we gladly 
acknowledge, in proving the Bible true chronologically; but 
as he is discarding its cosmogony he is not after all a true 
friend to the Bible. What should we think of a man who 
professed to defend us with a sword in one hand, if at the 
same time he himself gave us an occasional stab with a 
dagger held in the other ? We should probably say, “ save 
us from such friends.” 


On the cover of 7 he Earth there has appeared a map of 
the earth, not the world. Can any reader inform us what 
and when a ship or ships sailed due south from Cape Horn, 
Cape of Good Hope, India, and Honolulu; and did ice 
stay their progress as it does in sailing from Australia ?—J.W. 

What proof have we that “the dome of the heavens, or 

the firmament. is concave towards us,” as stated on page 

72, vol. iii. ?—J'.W. 

[I he text in Amos, already named gives the heaven a vault, 
which means a dome, and elsewhere the same meaning is 
applied. It is not the globular teaching at all, because the 


globe theory is : there is nothing but space over us, and all 
round. Therefore there can be no firmament vault in the 
globular system. If not a vault, what shape does J.W. think 
it to be ?—Ed.] 

Reply to query on Middleton’s Plan of the Earth .—The 
querist appears to be a disputant pure and simple, and 
he fails to distinguish between a ground plan and a map. 
He then proceeds to remark that the plan of the earth is not 
that of the world. What rational difference he can perceive 
between a plan of the earth and a plan of the world passes 
my limit of understanding. He then wishes to know if ships 
have sailed due South from certain points such as Cape Horn, 
India, and the Cape of Good Hope? The reply to this is 
that ships sail on Commercial routes which pay their owners, 
but they do not sail on unremunerative routes, such as he 
names, except when sent out by some Government and for 
some especial purpose—such as the present Antarctic ex¬ 
peditions. The questioner next wishes to know if vessels 
which might sail due south from the points above named, 
would be stayed in iheir progress by ice—as on a wide bar¬ 
rier, in opposition to the more narrow and confined South 
Pole, which is met with by ships sailing due South from 
Australia as one station alone ? 

The reply is, that this point is what we all wish to know. 
The late Antarctic expeditions were sent out presumably to 
settle this point ; and the result has not yet been formally 
reported upon, but it is said in Southampton that all the 
expeditions have failed, and this, I presume, means that a 
general barrier of ice has been found ; and probably the 
precise truth on this point will come out eventually, and in 
the course of a few months.—K. E. Middleton. 


By “ Rectangle.” 

(continued from p. in.) 

“ We are thus satisfied that the gifted author was not 
actually there, or he would have been melted in company 



with 1 iron and all other metals.' This is a relief, and en¬ 
ables us to at once and for ever dispose of his wild theories 
as baseless assumptions. In a certain case before the ma¬ 
gistrate, the culprit hardly liked to say that the witness 
against him was telling a lie, so he mildly said that the 
witness was ‘ handling the truth very carelessly.’ When 
Mr. Laing has the impertinence to tell us what lies below 
the surface of the earth for a depth of 25 miles we are bouud 
to say that he handles the truth in a careless and most 
reprehensible manner. 

With the usual unqualified manner for which scientists 
have become famous, Mr. Laing goes on to say : 

‘ Reasoning from these facts , ASSUMING the rate 
of change in the forms of life to have been the same 
formerly.Lyell has arrived at the conclusion that Geo¬ 

logy requires a period of not less than 200,000,000 of 
years to account for the phenomena which it discloses.’ 

To reason from facts and then to assume something which 
in its very essence is incapable of proof, is bad enough ; but 
to mis-call fictions facts, and then to add on to them what¬ 
ever assumption is necessary to maintain the result in keeping 
with the theory with which the start was made, is so atrocious 
that we are again forced to the conclusion that Geologists 
are lost in the fogs of their own creation, and cannot find 
their way through the millions of ages of their own imagin¬ 
ation, to anything having the remotest bit of truth in it. 
Once more, and I have done with Mr. Laing and his Geology. 
He informs us in the work already referred to that : 

‘The law of gravity, which IS THE FOUNDATION 
LAWS OF GEOLOGICAL ACTION has certainly pre¬ 
vailed, as will be shown later, through the enormous 
periods of geological time and far beyond this WE CAN 
DISCERN IT OPERATING in those astronomical 
changes by which cosmic matter has been condensed into 
nebula, nebulae into suns throwing off planets, and planets 
throwing off satellites, as they cooled and contracted.’ 

The laws of geological action being based on a myth— 



the law of gravitation—Geology itself may be “thrown off 
into space ” without any ill effects being felt anywhere. 

Geology is said to prove the extreme antiquity of the 
earth and of man. It is said that the sedimentary rocks are 
the result of the deposits from rivers, which rocks, on account 
of the slowness of their deposit and their great thickness 
have taken millions of years to form. It is further stated 
that in each series of rocks fossils have been found, proving 
that from the lower to the upper strata, the forms of life 
have been in the ascending scale, man being the highest 
and last species to be evolved. 

The first of these assertions is contradicted by Lyell, who, 
in his Students' Elements of Geology , page 9, says : 

“ It is not true, as was formerly supposed, that all 
granite together with the crysalline or metamorphic strata, 
were first formed and thereafter entitled to be called 
‘ primitive,’ and that the aqueous and volcanic rocks were 
afterwards super-imposed, and should therefore rank as 
secondary in the order of time. This idea was adopted 
in the infancy of the science, when all formations, whether 
stratified or unstratified, earthy or crysalline, with or 
without fossfls, were alike regarded as of aqueous origin.’ 

On page 5, he further says : 

“ Fossil shells, such as now abound in the sea are 
met with far inland, both near the surface and at great 
depths below it. They occur at all heights above the level 
of the ocean, having been observed at elevations of more 
than 8,000 feet in in the Pyrenees, 10,000 feet in the 
Alps, 13,000 feet in the Andes, and above 18,000 feet in 
the Himalayas. Col. R. A. Strachey found oolite fossils 
18,400 feet high in the Himalayas.” (That is 18,400 feet 
above sea level). 

Besides this, the rocks in question are homogeneous, and 
could not be formed as stated because the deposits of rivers 
are heterogeneous, and could not form homogeneous rocks. 
Thus the “deposit” theory, with its millions of ages, is 
quickly extinguished. 

Then, if fossils, representing lower forms of life were em¬ 
bedded in rocks which took millions of years to form, how 



is it that fossils from upper strata are found in lower strata 
and these from lower strata, said to be millions of ages old, 
found in upper strata, having, if the theory be true, worked 
their way, some upwards and others downwards, through 
rock millions of ages old. Marvellous fossils, if the theory 
be true ! ! ! 

Frederick Hovenden, in his What is Life ? page 133, says : 

“ We must keep in view that each stratum or layer has 
its special types of animals or plants, there are no hard 
and fast lines in their distribution, since they often pass 
from one stratum to another.” 

Thus we are assured that the “ lower form ” theory and 
the “ evolution ” idea are products of man’s fertile imagin¬ 
ation, having no foundation in fact. Sir Robert Ball says 
that the earth was once red hot, before that white hot, and 
earlier still, a mass of glowing vapour, but Hovendon says 

“This evidence tends to the view that igneous rocks 
may be changed sedimentary rocks—changed by heat 
and great pressure. If this alteration be simply caused 
by chemical re-action it is not necessary to suppose the 
earth was originally in an incandescent, white or red hot 

Sir R. Ball’s supposition is thus done to death by the 
“great pressure” of another conjecture. 


(From The Euture of December, 1892). 

“ Sir,— I should like to say a few words in reply to 
‘ Enquirer.’ His criticism of the One Hundred Proofs I shall 
leave Mr. Carpenter to answer. I am pleased to find that 
‘Enquirer’ has the candour to admit that ‘the effects of 
perspective alone are sufficient to compel the removal of 
the time-honoured mistake of the hull-down ‘ proof’ of the 

r,V 4 


sphericity of the earth.’ Yet this is generally considered to 
be one of the best popular proofs of the globe theory. But 
I think ‘ Enquirer ’ falls into a very common error when he 
says : ‘ At length when the apparent horizon is overpassed 
by an outward-bound ship, its hull gradually disappears.’ 
Now, according to the rules of perspective, objects below 
the level of the eye appear to rise to a point, or line, on a 
level with the eye as they recede ; but they never appear to 
rise above it, or 1 overpass ’ it, and then go down. The 
apparent horizon is always seen on a level with the eye of 
the spectator ; therefore, if the hull of a vessel be below the 
line of sight when it starts on its outward-bound voyage, it 
will, as long as it is visible, remain below the horizon. It 
will never overpass the horizon, or be seen above or on it; 
but the hull will disappear before it quite reaches the van¬ 
ishing point. As ‘Enquirer’ remarks: ‘Such instances 
should be noted with exactness.’ Last year,' when I was 
staying at Brighton, I watched the disappearance of out-going 
hulls with this special point in view. I pointed out this fact 
to others, who acknowledged I was right. Vanished hulls 
can often be rendered visible again by means of a good 
telescope. This proves they have not gone down below and 
beyond the horizon. 

“ In regard to the eclipse of the Moon hav ing been oc¬ 
casionally observed while the Sun was also visible above 
the horizon, this we regard as a proof that the earth is not a 
globe. The fact can be explained without the aid of the 
globe theory. ‘ Enquirer ’ admits the fact, but he assumes 
that we must be ignorant of ‘ the elementary knowledge 
he so kindly supplies. Like many others, he cannot argue 
in favour of the globe theory without innocently assuming 
the question at issue. Eor instance, he says, ‘ Atmospheric 
refraction raises a distant object 33', an amount which exceeds 
the apparent diameter of the Moon or the Sun ; and by con¬ 
sequence, both luminaries may be visible at one moment 
from one region of the earth’s surface.’ This reasoning 
quietly assumes one or both luminaries to be actually below 
the horizon, yet he admits that ‘ appearances are sometimes 
treacherous.’ Although the Sun appears to be set, it does 
not follow that the body of the Sun is actually below the 

earth. Perspective and the earth’s atmosphere are sufficient 
to account for the phenomena of sunset, without necessitating 


H 5 

the belief that the orb has really gone below the horizon. 
Now, the assumption of the globularists that it is the earth’s 
shadow which eclipses the Moon, requires the further as¬ 
sumption that either the Sun or the Moon is actually below 
the earth at the time of the eclipse of the Moon. Then, a 
third assumption is made to explain the fact that both Sun 
and eclipsed Moon are visible at one and the same moment 
(from the top of the earth) ; and this assumption, in order 
to fit with their theory is that ‘ atmospheric refraction raises 
a distant object.’ The fallacy of any one of these several 
and subtle assumptions would be sufficient to vitiate the 
whole argument in support of the globe theory. If the earth 
were really a globe, it would be impossible to see from the 
same place, at the same time, two apparently and compara¬ 
tively small orbs, in exact opposition on either side of the 
earth. It would take up too much space to show this by 
diagrams, or I would do so. One of the orbs would be at 
least 90° below the visible horizon, and our friends do not 
surely claim that atmospheric refraction can bring up a body 
90° above that horizon. At another opportunity, I should 
like to deal with that greatest assumption of all, viz: Solar 
attraction or ‘ Gravitation,’ without which the globular theory 
falls to the ground. 

Leicester. ZETETES.” 





(Prom the Gentleman's Magazine,Feb. 1 823,pp. 1 5 1 to 153) 
{continuedfrom p. 80). 

■' As the fact has latterly been fully proved by Mr. Parkins, 
the compressibility of water can no longer be denied ; and 
if it exist in a sufficient degree, the necessary consequences 
of this principle exactly corresponded with all the pheno¬ 
mena connected with the rising of the tides ; while without 
this principle, philosophers have no means of explaining 



why the moon’s attraction has no power to lift up any sub¬ 
stance besides water, why there are no tides in lakes, ponds, 
and all shallow waters, and in fact why the rising of Tides 
should give the waters any other motion ; because, if the 
moon’s attraction has the power to lift the waters up perpen¬ 
dicularly, it certainly must have power to prevent them from 
going off on an inclined plane ; and consequently, if the 
Newtonian theory were true, the waters would still be as 
stagnant as if there were no tides at all (pp. 6 & 7).” 

If high and low water are found to be determinable by 
certain ages of the moon, there is surely reason to suspect 
that there is as much necessary connexion between the earth 
and her satellite as between a mail coach and horses ; but 
one day or other, steam may be found equivalent to the 
latter ; in other words we mean that a chemical agency 
may enter into the modes of operation. It may be too subtle 
for experiment, but even admitting the inverse ratio (of which 
hereafter) of the square of the distance, the pretended and 
well known universal law, by which nature performs so many 
of her grand operations, it may still be philosophically pre¬ 
sumed that gravity and attraction are not so much laws as 
properties of nature, and that the former are yet Intent. We 
do not mean to say that the mathematics are not the roads 
in which nature travels ; we only mean that chemical phil¬ 
osophy furnishes the means of motion at all. Geometry 
cannot be a principle of sufficient extent for such an univer¬ 
sal law as that to which Sir Isaac Newton applies to it. 

We think that experiments to disprove it may be made 
with the air pump. The chemical attraction of cohesion is 
undoubted ; that forms density, and were the centre of 
the earth a vacuum, all bodies must tend to it. Capt. h orman 
shows (pp. 47-48) that the famous law of the square of the 
distance is unsound ; and the nearer a falling body approaches 
to the earth, the greater may be the weight of the super¬ 
incumbent atmosphere. No man can lift his hand off an 
exhausted receiver ; and every inch of this earth is pressed 
down by a column of air thirty miles high. We do not say 
we have unravelled this sphinx’s riddle, nor are we able to 
do so. We only believe chemical agency to be of much 
more universal operation in the laws of Nature than Geom¬ 
etry ; and that experiments concerning the real cause of 
gravity and attraction may be usefully made with the air 




pump, magnet, and thermometer. To use Capt. Forman’s 
arguments (pp. 16-17), in other views of the subject, it is hard 
to conjecture how propellant and stationary, centripetal and 
centrifugal properties can be made to act in unison, and yet 
the Newtonian theory of gravity implies as much, if we 
suppose the earth to act like a magnet by properties inherent 
in se ; any air rises in water: and hydrogen gas rises in air 
merely because the respective substances are lighter in bulk 
than the quantity of either of the respective fluids of the 
same dimensions. The gravity or attraction of the earth 
has nothing to do with these familiar phenomena, but it 
ought if the attraction was magnetic and universal. We are 
told that the contact of lunar rays ripens fruits, and accel¬ 
erates the growth of vegetables, (see Alexander Wilson’s 
Observations on the Influence of Climate on Animal and 
Vegetable Bodies , ch. VI.); and if so, we do not see, a priori, 
why there may not be a chemical action of the moon in 
reference to the Tides, and why Capt. Forman’s theory 
should not command a fair investigation. As to water 
vibrating and rising, there can be but three causes of it ; os¬ 
cillation of the containing body, agitation by heat, or removal 
of super-incumbent pressure. 

Here we must take our leave of Capt. Forman, who de¬ 
serves infinite praise for the gentlemanly manner with which 
he treats his opponents. 

All communications and enquiries respecting this Magazine and the teaching it 
upholds , and all questions and matter for insertion , should be addressed to 
R.A.M.B ., 1/, Gloucester Road) Kingston Hill. 


The Ed. does not necessarily endorse statements made under the headings of '* The 
Earth's ObservatoryLetters, etc ., tin less signed Ed. The Earth. 

The Whirling Globe Theory is a deep laid scheme of Satanic Origin. Satan 
uses suitable agents to carry out his plans and schemes, and work. — Ed. T.E. 

THE STAR SQUABBLE.—Siys Brewster to Whewell, let’s fight a star 
duel, Though you’re very cruel to raise such a strife. What ! Nature make 
worlds for mere lanterns or fuel ? I tell you all planets are swarming with life. 
S.iys Whewell to Brewster, you old Co.:k, or Rooster, Why will vou anew stir 



the question with me ? Excepting our planet, Creation’s whole cluster ’S as 
empty as you and your volume. Sir D. Says Brewster to Whewell, you’ve just 
got your gruel, So Mr. Professor, you’d best sleep upon it. Says Whewell to 
David, go get your head shaved, Unless you’re afraid of the bees in your 
bonnet. — from Punch , Oct. 28th, 1854. Sent by Dr. E. Haughton ; on the 
differences of scientists about elementary questions, re Dr. W. Whewell, F. R.S., 
Master of Trinity College, Cambridge, and Sir David Brewster who wrote a 
book against Whewell’s Plurality of Worlds. 


To the Editor of The Earth. —Madam, Your correspondent, Mr. Fred. B. 

\ Hughes, writing from Woodville, South Australia, says that “ the book and map 

duly and safely arrived, for which, and your trouble and kindness many thanks. 
Will you allow me to say that with the map I am not at all pleased. I have 
never been further away from Australia than New Zealand, but with these two 
countries I am well acquainted, and the shapes given on this plan are not at all 
accurate ; for instance, our overland telegraph line from Adelaide to Port Dar¬ 
win is a little under 2,000 miles in length, and runs nearly due North and South 
while Cape Cuvier on the West and Port Curtis on the east coast are separated 
by about 3,000 miles, or one and a half times as great from east to west as it is 
from north and south, whereas the map makes Sharkes Bay on the west coast 
to be three and a half times as far as Moreton Bay on the east as Adelaide, in 
the south, is from Port Darwin in the north ; that is if Port Darwin is 2,000 
miles from Adelaide, which we know to be the case because we have a measured 
telegraph line, then Sharkes Bay on the West Coast is 7,000 miles from Moreton 
Bay on the east coast which we know is not the case, in fact we know that it is 
not anything like 7,000 miles from Moreton Bay to Sharkes Bay even travelling 
round the coast by steamer, so that the shape of the Map must be wrong.” 

No doubt that in the flat-earth map, the longitudinal dimensions of the earth 
become enormously exaggerated. Taking the equator to be 25,000 miles round 
we shall find, on this scheme, that the more distant icy regions of the south 
entirely surround the map by a barrier of about 60,000 miles in circumference. 

And we may, therefore, be permitted to point out that the great geographical 
error arises from the impossibility of depicting on a flat-earth map the longi¬ 
tudinal distances from the North Pole otherwise than by their gradual widening 
as they approach the outer circumference of the earth. Just as reversely, on a 
spherical globe or map, the longitudinal distances are widest at the centre and 
become gradually narrower as they approach the north and south polar regions. 
And, therefore, the spherical map and the flat-earth map are alike geographically 
inaccurate as a reliable measure of one degree, or of the 360 degrees which 
actually represent the well known circumference of the earth. And the navi¬ 
gating officers of his majesty’s navy, and the navigating officers of our more 
numerous mercantile marine, would certainly have lost an innumerable number 
of valuable ships had they attempted to navigate the various oceans of the earth 
on the pictorially artificial maps of the flat-earth and spherical theorems. 

We are not aware that the surface of the land of the earth has, at any time, 
beer, accurately measured. But this important statement cannot be made in 
re^a'd to the water surfaces of the earth. Every sea has been thoroughly ex¬ 
plored, and its dimensions accurately measured as indicated in our Admiralty 
Chares. And it is upon the reliable authority of Admiralty Charts that His 
Majesty’s Navy and our Mercantile Marine are safely navigated, their positions 
bting daily and accurately ascertained bv the altitude of the sun in the heavens 
at 12 noon, calculated on the chronological basis of Greenwich mean time, and 
the reliable determinations of the mariner’s sextant. 

Yours faithfully, WM. M. DAVIDSON. 


^Auckland 1 


I 9 03. 


This is an attempt to show continents at a more just valuation than as repre¬ 
sented on either the over-sized Globe, or the elongated Mercator Chart. There 
is no reason to believe in an enormous China. 

Cnpe. of Good Mope 



SONNET TO A FRIEND Christmas, 1902. 

As closes now the so-called Old Year’s end— 

For Decem-bvx (the tenth month) is the last!— 

How fleeting are the Wings of Time which flutter past—• 

In Friendship’s Name a greeting line I send. 

Oh ! may our thoughts be turned from transient things 
Before in one eternal “ now ” we rest 
With Him whose truths alike we have confessed, 

And Time itself shall rest and close its wings. 

But while years roll may we tho’ sundered far 
Together labour for the Right and Good, 

As our Great Master did, and said we should, 

And wait and watch for His bright morning star ; 

Thus.shall our friendship in the Truth abound, 

And to God’s praise and glory yet be found. 



My lady, allow me to Write; I have said it ; 

Your paper, The Earth, which you so ably edit 
Reflects on you very considerable credit, 

Because as I say, 

The path you have chosen but few dare to tread it, 

So straight is the way. 

Walk in it right bravely, to neither side wavering. 

For Great is the Master, The Truth, you are serving, 

And His great example is bracing and nerving. 

To those who stand true ; 

Ere long He’ll return to reward the deserving, 

And He’ll reward you. 

The world may reproach us, we heed not its chiding, 

It understands not the great truths we abide in, 

We know Whom we’ve trusted, aud well may confide in 
The Word He has spoken ; 

The Scriptures, though critics so-called are deriding, 


The Kaiser was present at a lecture wherein “The famous Oriental Scholar” 
Professor Delitzsch stated that “scientific theology” had established the essen¬ 
tially diverse 4 literary elements’ of which the Bible was composed.” 


“ AN IMPUDENT HUSSY.—Lady Blount is a nice little lady, with white¬ 
ning hair and a delightful lisp. And as she describes in graphic fashion the 



errors and blunders of the scientists, she has ahabit of smiling in the most attrac¬ 
tive manner imaginable. Nobody could help liking her. But how terribly 
severe she was on the poor misguided men of science ! They have been under 
the tutelage of the Evil One ! There’s no other way of explaining their “scien¬ 
tific nonsense,’ as her Ladyship called it. Lady Blount takes her stand upon 
the Bible, and whenever science does not agree with Holy Writ, science has to 
give way. The earth, she says, is not round ; it does not career round the sun ; 
it is flat and immovable. 4 The pillars of the earth are the Lord’s, and He hath 
set the world upon them.’ And there are a hundred other texts which Lady 
Blount offers to show that the earth is immovable and Modern Science is an 
impudent hussy for venturing to deny it. 

44 Some of Lady Blount’s reasons lor believing the earth is a plane and not 
a globe were very amusing. It was said that vessels had sailed round the globe 
east or west, but nobody had gone round north or south ; and how, therefore, 
could the rotundity of the earth be ‘proved’ ? It was also said that the sun 
was also vastly bigger than the earth, and that from that great luminary we de¬ 
rived light and warmth. But would anyone make a lamp bigger than the room 
which it was designed to light? Absurd ! The sun and moon were set in 4 the 
firmament of heaven to give light upon the earth and to rule over the day and 
over the night.’ But it is impossible to do more here than indicate the general 
character of the arguments. The humour of the evening was complete when 
Major Rasch, M.P., who was present, was unexpectedly called upon to second 
a vote of thanks to the fair ‘pianist.’ Lady Blount, he said, amid peals of 
merriment, might congratulate herself upon being outside Springfield Gaol, for 
he had heard Lord Chief Justice Cockburn, in that very building, sentence a 
man who believed the earth was flat to 12 months hard labour.’ The meeting, 
which had been packed to overflowing—many being unable to find even standing 
room—was then brought to a close.”— The Essex Weekly News . 

[The above, and also a long report of the meeting upon another page, appeared 
in The Essex Weekly News. N.B.—“ A Counterfeit of Truth ” should 
be the words in place of 44 An Impudent Hussy,” in the extract quoted above ; 
the latter is an expression we should never use. To our dear friends Mr. 
and Mrs. Clare, and Mr. and Mrs. Johnson, of Chelmsford, we are deeply 
indebtedted for their kindness and aid. We are receiving numerous enquiries 
which is very encouraging.—Ed. T.E.] 

“SEEKING CONVERTS.—Lady Blount came to Chelmsford on Tuesday 
seeking converts to her theory that the world is as flat as a pancake, and not a 
4 rotating, revolving globe.’ Her ladyship is an enthusiast on the subject, be¬ 
lieving that the Bible teaches the true science, while all else is false and based 
upon groundless hypothesis. In her zeal she can, with evident satisfaction to 
herselt and surprise at the obfuscation of others, combat and explain merrily 
away everything by which scientists are determined that we are on a whirling 
twirling sphere. She spoke for two hours, and had it not then been about time 
for her train to depart she would probably have continued to entertain her 
crowded audience lor a much longer period. Hard as her ladyship tried to hit, 
amusing as she often was, I have not heard of many converts. At the close, 
handing ‘documentary evidence’ to Major Rasch, M.P., who seconded a vote 
of thanks to her in such a way that he clearly showed his entire disagreement 
with what her ladyship had said, lady Blount expressed the hope that the lion, 
member had come over to her side. 4 1 should not like to give an answer off¬ 
hand,’ was the gallant Major’s diplomatic reply, 4 but I will look at these 
papers ! ’ In being requested to second the vote of thanks the Major was sud¬ 
denly forced into an unexpected situation, hut he emerged from it in magnificent 
style. No questions were put to Lady Blount in response to her invitation, 
although there were several gentlemen in the room who had stood aghast at the 
idea of the world being anything but globular. Lady Blount does not hesitate 



to condemn all the misled persons—led by the nose, she says—who think the 
world is anything but a plane, and she consigns us—well, to ‘a great loss’— 
if we wilfully resist the truth, ‘which is strong and must prevail.’ I have 
been asked many times what Lady Blount is like.” (The reporter’s description 
of the Ed. is far too kind, therefore we refrain from reprinting it.) “ The aud¬ 
ience was so large that the hall Would not accommodate them, many listening 
as best they could on the landings .”—The Essex County Chronicle. 

[A long report of the proceedings also appeared in another column.] 

The German Ambassador presents his compliments to Lady Blount, and begs 
to thank her for the copy of the works Zetetic Cosmogvny and The Earth , to¬ 
gether with several other papers which she sent for His Majesty the Emperor’s 

To the Lady Blount. 

TLhz Htonement. 

"SOLD UNDER SIN.”— Rom. vii. 14. 

Through Jesus Christ we also "joy in God,” 

Because “The Atonement” we have now received; 

No human righteousness could innate joy afford ; 

Peace comes through Christ, in whom we have believed. . 
And when upon "the Lamb of God ” our sins are laid, 

The Reconciliation’s sealed ; the debt is paid. [Rom. v. 11.] 

Divinely charged with mystery God’s Plan, 

Before the world’s foundation it was sealed,— 

As through the sin of one death passed on every man, 

So by one Man, Redemption was revealed. 

And “ in due time,” behold ! the Son of God, 

He purchased our Salvation with His blood. [Tom. v. 6.] 

Before the world we now behold was form’d, 

Proud Lucifer in heav’n dared to rebel, 

And he, who once with pow’r and beauty dom’d, 

Became corrupt, and from his high place fell ! 

Then Jesus spake the words in our record, 

“Lo ! I will come to do Thy will, O Lord.” [Heb.\. 7 Sc 9; Ps. xl.] 

He came. And what reception was there given 
To Him—endued with power supreme, and wide ?— 

Even the Christ of God did come , a Man from heaven, 

To bear our sorrows, and our sins to hide. 

His love was patient, and for love He died, 

While sinners cried " Let Him be crucified ! ” [ John i. 11.] 

The pow’r of the Atonement will unfold, 

When God confirms each promise in His Word. 

Yet all His "purposes” unknown, or told, 

In Christ are seen, or through God’s Spirit heard. 

God " works in a mysterious way ” we see, 

Yet He unveils in part His Mystery ! [Eph. ill. II; 1 Tim.Yn. 16. ] 



In olden times, when yearly the High Priest 

"The Atonement” offered once for Israel’s sin, 

The blood of beasts but partially released. 

It could not cleanse the soul from guilt within. 

The offering as a symbol typified 

Our Great High Priest’s Atonement prophesied. [//<?£.ix. 8 .] 

‘ God was in Christ” the promised " seed” to Eve, 

While Jesus is the medium of God’s grace. 

God’s Spirit brings the blessing we receive 

Through our High Priest, who suffered in our place. 

He gave Himself for us upon the Tree, 

"The Just One for the unjust;” died for me ! 

Gen. iii. 15; Rom. v. 12-19. 
But while as yet to some " The Way ” seems dark, 

Sufficient is the super-natural Light 
Within God’s Word, to raise a brighter spark 
And kindle living flames of Truth and Right. 

Its wond’rous Light to human eye unknown, 

Brings Life, Eternal Life, from the Eternal Throne. [Johnxiv. 6 ] 

" The blood is the Life,” and it contains the soul, 

As witnessed by men moved by Holv Ghost, 

Men raised by God Redemption’s plan to unroll, 

Before our mortal eyes and heaven’s great hoU. 

As by one man we forfeit life through sin, r"Christ ourPass-n 
Atonement through the sinless One we win. L over.” ICor. v. 7-1 

" We have also received The Earthy an occasional magazine in which cranks 
contend that the earth is flat, and believe in the astronomy of the Hebrew book 
of Genesis, including the Ark fairy tale, and the exploded authorship by Moses 
of that complication of patch-work phrases gathered at different periods.”— 
Reynolds , 21/12/02. 

By the above, Reynolds' Newspaper evidently thinks that “the least said, the 
soonest mended.” The deluded reviewer well knows, that the Globe Mud is 
too thick and pestiferous to stir up, so he is reduced to harmless cavil, and 
blowing air bubbles at the Bible. Pianists always feel flattered by being des¬ 
ignated " cranks,” such being generally those whose intellectual abilities, and 
arguments are too strong for their puny opponents to grapple with. 

The Referee and Daily News , being true types of modern journalism, are 
aware that "discretion is the better part of valour”; they remaining dumb 
dogs on The Earth , which was presented to them to review. Fearfully micro¬ 
scopical is the courage of editors and penny-a-liners of the jackal press, especially 
of those professing to enlighten the Public—with something as lucid as Egyptian 


It being quite imp issible to reply to all correspondents, we, therefore, sincerely 
thank each one of our friends for the numerous kind and encouraging letters 
received and deeply appreciated. 



The Gardens, Ilolt. 

I stood on the cliff at Cromer the other day and gazed over the vast expanse 
of ocean, as far as the eye could trace, and it seemed to me to curve so to 
speak. I do not know what to think ! Will you explain the reason for this 
appearance? I do not think it matters much now whether we live on a “vast 
plane ” as Longfellow puts it, cr on a “whirling globe.” If we are grounded 
on The Rock. I do like your verses ; they are so pithy; my daughter is also 
pleased with them. Whether we accept the Theory or not, pardon me for saying 
we were very much fascinated with your personality; I shall never forget you. 

With sincere and admiring affection, may I sign myself, your devoted friend. 


[We are very grateful for the numerous encouraging and appreciative letters 
(similar to the above, and printed by request) received from ladies who have 
attended our lecture*. It will not be out of place here to make the following 
remarks:—The kind expressions in the foregoing letter are greatly appreciated. 
It is written by a lady of prepossessing appearance and demeanour ; but as she 
favours the teaching of Swedenborg she is impeded from accepting the Cos¬ 
mogony upheld by us. Swedenborg’s teaching regarding the shape and nature 
of the earth and universe has been adopted (with a few additions) by “ Koresh” 
of Chicago, U.S.A., which he styles the Cellular Cosmogony. We are thankful 
to note that the kind encouragement hitherto received from our own sex is in¬ 
creasing ; this is as it should he, for Woman having been endowed with mental 
capacities and placed upon the earth by the Creator, has an undoubted right to 
study and consider the nature and proportions of her God bestowed environment 

Berth Observatory, Oct. *>Oth, HK>2. 

The Editress of “The Earth. 

Madam,—Somebody has been so good as to send me a copy of The Earth , 
No. 27 Sc 28, wherein a letter of mine to I)r. Langdon is reproduced. Please 
allow me to express my regret at the general tone of that communication. I.i 
writing it I had no idea whatever that it would be so utilized. It frequently 
happens that in private correspondence or conversation one uses somewhat ex¬ 
travagant terms, and I should never officially or publicly speak in such a manner 
of opinion honestly held by people whose views differ from my own. 

Nor should I attempt to publicly criticise your theories, with the nature of 
which I am so imperfectly acquainted. 

Please allow me to make one point clear. I started that letter to Dr. Lang¬ 
don with the intention of shewing that the author of The Midnight Sun, in 
criticising the modern astronomical theories, had first of all misrepresented them, 
and so it was necessary for me to indicate where, according to these theories, 
the sun’s direction should appear on his diagram. As soon as this correction 
was made the critics argument vanished. I notice that after clearing up this 
point I proceeded to attack the pianists’ theories, and have thus laid myself 
open to the same mistake as was made by the author of The Midnight Sun , viz. 
criticising a theory about which I admittedly know next to nothing. Once 
again, then, kindly remember that my letter has been published without my 
knowledge or consent and was not written for publicity. I may have totally 
misrepresented herein the pianists’ theories ; indeed I cannot help feeling that 
I must have done so. Yours faithfully, W. ERNEST COOKE. 

We have received the above letter from Mr. Ernest Cooke, of the Perth Ob¬ 
servatory, W. Australia, which perhaps calls for a few remarks. 

We are glad our friend has written in so kind and courteous a spirit, which 
we trust we can reciprocate. Though the first letter necessarily called forth 


I 55 

some strong remarks from our friend and correspondent “ Zetetes,” we are sure 
he has not the slightest ill will personally to anyone who holds the globular 
theory, much less to a gentleman in the position of Mr. Cooke. But we feel 
it is our duty to expose that which we believe to be error ; and error of such a 
subtle nature that it is turning the minds of the people from the Bible as a 
revelation from God to man. 

In publishing Mr. Cooke’s letter we hope we did him no injustice when we 
simply allowed him to speak for his own side,—a privilege which we should 
be glad of in any scientific publication. Our only desire is to have and to set 
forth the truth in this great question of the Creation and shape of the earth on 
which we live. If, therefore, our astronomical friend and critic cares to write 
further in defence of the globular theory we shall be pleased to admit his argu¬ 
ments, in The Earth , when no doubt our correspondent “Zetetes” will further 
examine them in the same courteous spirit which we are now pleased to note in 
the above letter. We do not ask him to say anything more than he likes about 
the “ plane theory,” r.s he calls it, as he owns he does not understand it; hut we 
invite him to defend his own side with which he is no doubt perfectly familiar. 

The question underlying the controversy is of course the primary one, namely, 
Is the earth a whirling globe ? If Mr. Cooke will attempt to prove that it is, 
we shall be pleased further to publish his arguments that the question may be 
thoroughly and fairly discussed. We cannot offer anything more fair.—Ed. of 
The Earth. 


Answer to E.R.B.—If we are inclined to believe that the earth stands like a 
great eminence founded in the water, motionless, but like a great hill—What 
objection have you to this ? There are instruments which can tell the exact 
pressure of the atmosphere, and these instruments therefore show the height of 
a mountain. They show how high a traveller goes up a mountain ; but they do 
not show anything which supports this idea. 

The following are the questions which I handed in to Mr. Johnson : 

(1) How do you account for the fact that the distance between two meridians 
of longitude, one degree apart on the equator, is about 69 miles, and as we 
recede either Northwards or SoutAwaidslhe distance between the same meridians 
diminishes, and diminishes in the same ratio to the distance from the equator, 
both North and South ? 

(2) How do you explain the fact that when the days and nights are equal 
in duration at the equator, as we approach the North or South the periods of 
duration become more and more unequal as we get into high latitudes, until in 
the Polar regions we get fix months of day and summer, alternating with six 
months of night and winter? 

(3) How would you explain the difference of time in various places on the 
earth, or in other words—why does the sun appear to rise earlier in some places 
than in others ? You will recollect that the sun rises 4 minutes earlier for every 
degree of longitude East ; e.g ., when it is 12 (noon) at Greenwich it will be only 
II a.m. at Naples (15° E). 

I shall esteem it a favour to receive a reply from vou, for which I thank you 
in anticipation. Yours faithfully, HAROLD A. WATKIN. 

Ans. —(1) We have no proof that the degrees converge Southwards. If you 



can give us proof that they do we will examine it, and report accordingly. 

(2) The proportional lengths of the day and night do not vary when the 
sun is on the equator, neither would they as “we approach the equator at that 
time of the year. But when the sun approaches the north the days of course 
become longer and the nights shorter in these parts ; and in the south the nights 
of course becpme longer and the days shorter, because the sun is further away 
from them. 

(3) The difference of time in different places is owing to the face that the 
sun comes to those places at different times in its journey round above the earth. 
The sun moves in one hour 15°, therefore when it is 12 (noon) at Greenwich 
it will be one o’clock at Naples, not 11. 

What causes the moon’s half, quarter, and full appearances from our stand¬ 
point?—A. Y. R. Ans .—If you get an indiarubber ball and paint over one half 
of it some kind of phosphorus paint, then take it in a dark room, and turn it 
round you will see all the phases of the moon as the ball turns. 

(1) If the earth is a plane how can you account for day and night, as the sun 
disappears at one point and re-appears at the opposite point ? (2) How do you 
account for time differences, as when it is 12 (mid-day) here it is 9 p.m. in 
Australia? If as you said, water under the earth, how can the sun pass under 
and re-appear at the opposite point to its disappearance?—E.P. 

Ans. —(1) The sun is not large enough to light all of the earth at once, be¬ 
cause the atmosphere resists the rays when the san gets too far away over any 
particular part. But when the sun comes round again to the East we see it 
once more, and it brings morning light. (2) The sun never passes “under the 
earth,” but goes round above the earth. But when it getb away too far from us 
its rays cannot reach us because of the perspective of the distance, and the 
atmosphere. The reason why the time is out in Australia from our time is be¬ 
cause Australia lies on the opposite side of the plane earth, and the sun does 
not reach those parts until about ten hours after it has been over England. 


: ; -T' 1—:- 

(1) The fact that the sun and moon have both been seen above the horizon at 
the tiitid when a lunfyr <fclipse occurred , x pro^s thatz’.fc not tlxe shadow of t’he 
earth wllidlvcitusfes* the mdon’s fcclipse, * ;(2) Parallax’”' thought that k se\m- 
opaque or dark moon coming between our moon and an observer on the earth 
so caused the .eclipse. . Astronomers - have-ever "admitted the existence of dark 
bodies in the skies. “ Zetetes ” suggests in his teaching that the moon’s eclipse 
may be cpy^ed-by its getting into, a/nj.assy of thick darkness which revolves 
around and over the earth in opposition, to the sun. But in any case we cannot 
admit that it is the shadow of the earth-because we do not admit that the earth 
is a heavenly body rushing through space, because it is' contrary to the teaching 
of the Hjoly;Scriptures and/aljjq tq; the evidenpe jof o!ur serisesiand demonstrated 
facts., 1 ; . . . 

If you sail i(I,,0(X) miles east in ofie parricufiir latitude the game stars hold the 
same posJliGto to you-exactly & they did at Starting,! Wilt if you start ttiwer Mown 
the^aspect, qf the heavens.i^ totally different^,. Thij^ t i^ because tjie- sjtavsi move; 
round the earth from east to’ west ; but the stags' do not move north and south. 



Nos. 33 & 34. 



Extracts from Addresses given by Lady Blount. 

TRUTH is a certain sound , divinely garnished, 

But fiction ever is with falsehood tarnished. 

“ The truth of the Religion of any people may be tested by its 
Cosmogony ; whatever it may be, the system of Religion asso¬ 
ciated with it must stand or fall." —Lord Macaulay (Lives of 

the Popes.) 

Science is simply the Latin word Scientia, which means 
Knowledge reduced to system under general facts or principles 

Fad we know is solid, and is the very essence of veracity. 
But Romance is not Truth. It is the very opposite to it; it 
is fiction. 

Now we maintain that no system, however elaborated, can 
be placed on the high pedestal described as “ Science” unless 
it be uncontrovertibly based and founded upon Fact. 

Therefore all things, whether they be methods, or systems, 
or mere calculations, without a true factor or foundation to 
start upon, are really only superficially erected upon hypo¬ 
thesis : and being without true origin or foundation we know 
are not only unproven in themselves, but when such things 
are in contradiction to the Holy Scriptures they cannot be 
more graphically described than as the Scriptures describe 
them, viz. : “ Science falsely so-called.” 

And this so-called “ science” is not true knowledge, it is 
opposite to Truth. 

Nevertheless truth undivided is essential to every individ¬ 
ual upon the face of the earth, and not merely a part of it; 
and so far as we are bound in error we are held in bondage. 

If we are thus bound unwittinly, or even unwillingly, we 
may not suffer condemnation. But in any case we shall 
suffer loss—and it may be great loss. 

1 5<5 


can give us proof that they do we will examine it, and report accordingly. 

(2) The proportional lengths of the day and night do not vary when the 
sun is on the equator, neither would they as “we approach the equator at that 
time of the year. But when the sun approaches the north the days of course 
become longer and the nights shorter in these parts ; and in the south the nights 
of course become longer and the days shorter, because the sun is further away 
from them. 

(3) The difference of time in different places is owing to the face that the 
sun comes to those places at different times in its journey round above the earth. 
The sun moves in one hour 15°, therefore when it is 12 (noon) at Greenwich 
it will be Qne o’clock at Naples, not 11. 

What causes the moon’s half, quarter, and full appearances from our stand¬ 
point ?—A. Y. R. Ans .—If you get an indiarubber ball and paint over one half 
of it some kind of phosphorus paint, then take it in a dark room, and turn it 
round you will see all the phases of the moon as the ball turns. 

• 3 §Bn§UB[ 

vpuaaj; sqj SuiqoEoj jo poqjaui pasuapuoD X[J3A3p b siqj 
(Uiqi 3 A\ puB ‘s3[dtuBxa jo dnojS qoB3 saipapun jbuiuibjq. 
•aouBiq ui uaqods Xpunpu si ji se qouajj jnq ‘saijUBijnoadi 
[EDi^ojopqd pssoj ou 1 ajq .tnoX jjb qouajj jqEj o; noX ajqBuai 
oj juaiayjns ! uoijbsj3auoo X-reuipaq ui pasn jsoui sjb qoiqAt 
‘suioipi puB ‘spaoM puEsnoqi 33Jqj sqj suibjuod jajqooq sqj; 

•qAom, 2 (ioqv oqi Suipudimuoosa ui 3msv3j4 yonm 3avif 
•zo6i ‘NOIliaS 03SIA3H 


" V '’-v ' r 

<wrfTOTO ; IS kTFTTTiTW/r »t 'wrx 

To the Ed.—Will you allow me to ask you what is the reason for, or cause of 
eclipses of the moon? According to the flat-earth theory, if I understood it 
correctly, both the sun and moon (as well as the stars), are always moving in 
their circuits above the earth’s level, never really dipping the horizon, only ap¬ 
pearing to do so by distant recession. Consequently it would be impossible 
for the shadow through which the moon passes (when eclipsed) to be that of 
the earth. What shadow is it ? If it indeed be the shadow of the earth it 
would prove—( 1 ) That the sun is as much belozv as is the angular altitude of 
the moon ; and ( 2 ) the shape hf the edge of the shadow being always circular 
at all times, and under all conditions ever witnessed anywhere, and everywhere, 
would go a long way toward proving the rotundity of the earth, for only a glob¬ 
ular body can at all times throw a shadow with a circular edge. 

When the eclipse of the moon happens on or near the meridian as it some¬ 
times does, the sun must be right under the earth in order to cause the earth’s 
shadow to fall in that direction. I am, etc., H.A.R. 



Vol. III. Nos. 33 & 34 . 



Extracts from Addresses given by Lady Blount. 

TRUTH is a certain sound , divinely garnished, 

But fiction ever is with falsehood tarnished. 

“ The truth of the Religion of any people may be tested by its 
Cosmogony; whatever it may be, the system of Religion asso¬ 
ciated with it must stand or fall.'' —Lord Macaulay (Lives of 

the Popes.) 

Science is simply the Latin word Scientia, which means 
Knowledge reduced to system under general facts or principles 

Fact we know is solid, and is the very essence of veracity. 
But Romance is not Truth. It is the very opposite to it; it 
is fiction. 

Now we maintain that no system, however elaborated, can 
be placed on the high pedestal described as “ Science” unless 
it be uncontrovertibly based and founded upon Fact. 

Therefore all things, whether they be methods, or systems, 
or mere calculations, without a true factor or foundation to 
start upon, are really only superficially erected upon hypo¬ 
thesis : and being without true origin or foundation we know 
are not only unproven in themselves, but when such things 
are in contradiction to the Holy Scriptures they cannot be 
more graphically described than as the Scriptures describe 
them, viz. : “ Science falsely so-called.” 

And this so-called “ science” is not true knowledge, it is 
opposite to Truth. 

Nevertheless truth undivided is essential to every individ¬ 
ual upon the face of the earth, and not merely a part of it; 
and so far as we are bound in error we are held in bondage. 

If we are thus bound unwittinly, or even unwillingly, we 
may not suffer condemnation. But in any case we shall 
suffer loss—and it may be great loss. 



can give us proof that they do we will examine it, and report accordingly. 

(2) The proportional lengths of the day and night do not vary when the 
sun is on the equator, neither would they as “we approach the equator at that 
time of the year. But when the sun approaches the north the days of course 
become longer and the nights shorter in these parts ; and in the south the nights 
of course become longer and the days shorter, because the sun is further away 
from them. 

(3) The difference of time in different places is owing to the fact that the 
sun comes to those places at different times in its journey round above the earth. 
The sun moves in one hour 15°, therefore when it is 12 (noon) at Greenwich 
it will be one o’clock at Naples, not 11. 

What causes the moon’s half, quarter, and full appearances from our stand¬ 
point ?—A. Y. R. ,4ns. —If you get an indiarubber ball and paint over one half 
of it some kind of phosphorus paint, then take it in a dark room, and turn it 
round you will see all the phases of the moon as the ball turns. 

(1) If the earth is a plane how can you account for day and night, as the sun 
disappears at one point and re-appears at the opposite point ? (2) How do you 

account for time differences, as when it is 12 (mid-day) here it is 9 p.m. in 
Australia ? If as you said, water under the earth, how can the sun pass under 
and re-appear at the opposite point to its disappearance?—E.P. 

Ans. —(1) The sun is not large enough to light all of the earth at once, be¬ 
cause the atmosphere resists the rays when the s.m gets too far away over any 
particular part. But when the sun comes round again to the East we see it 
once more, and it brings morning light. (2) The sun never passes “under the 
earth,” but goes round above the earth. But when it gets away too far from us 
its rays cannot reach us because of the perspective of the distance, and the 
atmosphere. The reason why the time is out in Australia from our time is be¬ 
cause Australia lies on the opposite side of the plane earth, and the sun does 
not reach those parts until about ten hours after it has been over England. 


(1) The fact that the sun and moon have both been seen above the horizon at 
the time 1 when' a lunljr Eclipse occiitredp/trowki that'# zA not tlxe shadow of rim 
earth wlhdh‘c;tus'esMhe radon’s dclipse. .(2) v - Parallax,”' thought that i senii- ‘ 
opaque or dark moon coming between our moon and an observer on the earth 
so caused: the eclipse. . Astronomers’ have- ever "admitted ’the existence of dark 
bodies in the skies. “ Zetetes ” suggests in his teaching that the moon’s eclipse 
may be by, its getting into, a, mass, of thirJ\ darkness which, revolves 

around and over the earth in opposition, to the sun. But in any case wc cannot 
admit that it is the shadow of the earth because .we do not admit that the earth 
is a heavenly body rushing through space, because it is contrary to the teaching 
of the Holy Scriptures and al^q to: the evidence jof o'ltr senses: and demonstrated 

*»• • i li =S."t "• I. . 1 r - : 

! to’'") . ‘ J * ■ 

If you sail 19,000 miles east in ofie particular latitude the same Stars hold the 
same position, to you*exactly a's they did at Storting ,' Ifiit if you start fewer'down. ! 
thejaspectj of the heavens, iy totaljy different.,,. This ci i r s. becaujse- tjie stars: mo\e : j. 
round the earth front east to west.; but the star^ do not move north and south. 

t: 1 


Vol. III. Nos. 33 & 34. 



Extracts from Addresses given by Lady Blount. 

TRUTH is a certain sound, divinely garnished, 

But fiction ever is with falsehood tarnished. 

“ The truth of the Religion of any people may be tested by its' 
Cosmogony ; whatever it may be, the system of Religion asso¬ 
ciated with it must stand or fall.” —-Lord Macaulay (Lives of 

the Popes.) 

Science is simply the Latin word Scientia, which means 
Knowledge reduced to system under general facts or principles 

Fact we know is solid, and is the very essence of veracity. 
But Romance is not Truth. It is the very opposite to it ; it 
is fiction. 

Now we maintain that no system, however elaborated, can 
be placed on the high pedestal described as “ Science” unless^ 
it be uncontrovertibly based and founded upon Fact. 

Therefore all things, whether they be methods, or systems, 
or mere calculations, without a true factor or foundation to 
start upon, are really only superficially erected upon hypo¬ 
thesis : and being without true origin or foundation we know 
are not only unproven in themselves, but when such things 
are in contradiction to the Holy Scriptures they cannot be 
more graphically described than as the Scriptures describe 
them, viz. : “ Science falsely so-called.” 

And this so-called “ science ” is not true knowledge, it is 
opposite to Truth. 

Nevertheless truth undivided is essential to every individ¬ 
ual upon the face of the earth, and not merely a part of it; 
and so far as we are bound in error we are held in bondage. 

If we are thus bound unwittinly, or even unwillingly, we 
may not suffer condemnation. But in any case we shall 
suffer loss—and it may be great loss. 



It is a disadvantage from an argumentative standpoint, 
when dealing with atheistic opponents to the Bible and its 
inspiration, if we are not equipped so as to be able to defend 
it from every possible point of view. 

But alas ! the world of children, in all sorts of schools, are 
taught to regard the Modern Scripture-Contradicting 
“ Science” as infallible ; while the Bible is set down as being 
very fallible ! 

Some men assert that they have “ more evidence in favour 
of their so-called science than the teachings of Moses.” 
And infidels assume that “ Moses can be shown to be caught 
red-handed in ignorance and error.” And they ask de¬ 
risively “ what shall we think of the Christ who quoted and 
referred to Moses as an authority ? ” 

But Jesus, the Christ, who stated when he was before His 
earthly judge Pontius Pilate, that he had come forth from 
the Father-God to bear witness to the truth said : “ had ye 
believed Moses, ye would have believed me ; for he wrote of 
me. But if ye believe not his writings how shall ye believe 
my words ? ”— John v. 46, 47. 

Therefore, there can be no variation in replying to the 
question, What is Truth? 

God’s Word is Truth, i.e., The Creator’s Word. 

And Jesus Christ is the embodiment of that Word. 

“ And the Word was made flesh. 

It is an unimpeachable fact that the Bible is as scientifically 
accurate in its description of Creation, as it is in setting forth 
Redemption in and through our dear Redeemer. 

A well known infidel has said that “ Christians are fools ” 
because they place their faith in the Bible in some things 
while they own it to be fallacious in others. For instance, 
they accept its offer of “ salvation,” and rest upon its prom¬ 
ises on these lines ; but, at the same time, they accept the 
teaching of man with regard to Modern Science, as being 
more reliable than the Bible which it flatly contradicts as to 
the facts of Creation. 

We endorse this statement, therefore let us trace the ori¬ 
gin of this Scripture-contradicting “ Science,” and let us 
analyze its nature and bearings. 

The origin of the Globular theory may be traced and shown 
to be Pagan. It was introduced into Egypt by the Greek 
Pythagoras, about 600 B.C. He was a native of Samos, and a 
great traveller in his early days. He travelled much in the 




East. And he imbibed the fallacious idea that the earth 
and sea together formed a whirling globe ; and that the 
heavenly bodies were other worlds (inhabited). He also ac- 
accepted the false doctrine of the transmigration of souls,from 
pagan magicians and Eastern inventors ofromance and fiction. 

Pythagoras returned to Europe and introduced these serious 
errors into his own country ; but after a time his party was 
dispersed, probably through dissent, and he left his native 
land. He went to Italy, where he met with a warm reception ; 
and there, with a few followers, he collected many disciples 
and founded a College, and a sect which took the name of 
Pythagoreans. But ultimately an opposing division besieged 
and set fire to his College, and many of the Pythagorean 
students and disciples thus’met with an untimely end. And 
whether Pythagoras escaped himself has never been as¬ 

But the mythical pagan doctrines which he had brought 
from the East were sown in the two European countries, 
Greece and Italy ; and faith in these pagan fables became 
widely spread : until Ptolemy, who lived contemporaneously 
with the early Christians, so scouted and denounced these 
false ideas, that all belief in the Earth’s motions, and the 
transmigration of souls was wholly abandoned for l ; 6ooyears, 
i.e., until 1,600 A.D., when Copernicus revived the whirling 
globe theory. 

But Copernicus’ followers were too hasty in publishing 
his writings—even before he was himself fully satisfied that 
the Pythagorean basis on which he had built his calculations 
rested on a solid foundation. It is stated that his misgivings, 
caused by dread of censure, were so great,that they hastened, 
if not caused his death. His most prominent works were 
published on the very day he died ! 

Kepler and Galileo took up the hypothesis, followed by one 
of the greatest, if not the greatest mathematician the world 
has ever produced—namely, Sir Isaac Newton. 

However, the wisdom of mortals is no standard measuring- 
rod of infallibility and Truth. Newton was no logician, and 
logic formed no part of his composition. Nor did he profess 
to possess this quality which is absolutely essential to a 
discerner and founder of true Science. 

But, nevertheless, Newton was deficient in this particular. 
For he spent his whole life in inventing and formulating an 
elaboration which he called the Solar System, building upon 



the mythical fallacies which Pythagoras had brought from the 
East in the first instance ; and which had been handed down 
by Copernicus Kepler, and Galileo. Without testing the 
nature of his foundations he accepted the whole fabrication, 
and took Copernicus’ hypothesis all “ for granted.” 

But Kepler was his ideal fancy, or oracle of wisdom ! 

Thus we may clearly perceive the origin, and manner of 
establishment of the globular theory ; and it is a fact that it 
is based upon pagan myths, and the nature of its foundations 
are purely hypothetical, as even Copernicus’ own confessions 
will testify. 

He owned that the Pythagorean teaching was founded 
upon hypothesis, and that it was not “ necessary that hypo¬ 
thesis should be true, or even probable.” 

And again, that “the hypothesis of terrestrial motion was 
nothing but an hypothesis.” The supporters of modern 
astronomy either forget or ignore the self-condemning con¬ 
fessions of the founders of the globe theory, and they also 
close their eyes to its fabulous nature. 

Of course it is highly probable that Copernicus knew 
where Pythagorus had learned this Arabian Night-like story 
of the globe theory and kindred fallacies, which were simply 
the outcome of the wildest and most ungodly imaginations 
of ungodly men. And it appears that, but too late, he, to 
some extent realized that his writings were based merely 
upon falsehoods invented in the far East by mystically dis¬ 
eased heathen minds and inventors of magic. 

Lord Macaulay’s pronounced words, at the head of this 
chapter, are true : “The truth of the religion of any people 
may be tested by its cosmogony.” We go further and say 
that the veracity of the Bible may be tested by its cosmogony. 
Let us therefore apply this test, and let us settle the question 
whether we shall have to write at the end of these pages, 
“ The Romance of the Bible,” or “ The Romance of Science.” 

Having traced the origin of the whirling globe theory, let 
us now analyze its nature and its bearings by the dictates 
of Reason, governed by the unimpeachable claims of the 
Holy Scriptures. 

If we only allow our reason and observation to act apart 
from the prejudices of our early training there is not a single 
fact in all Nature which goes in opposition to the teaching 
of the Bible, but, on the contrary, all the practical experi¬ 
ments that have ever been made, go unmistakably to prpve 



that the Bible is as scientifically accurate when it states that 
God “ hath fixed the earth on its basis that it shall not be 
removed for ever,” as it is in setting forth the promise of 
Eternal Life and Re-Creation in and through our Lord, 
Jesus the Christ. 

In connection with the Newtonian theory the first thing of 
which we are informed is that the Earth is a “ planet,” and 
that it is one of a group of orbs which circle round the sun, 
and hence are called the “ Solar System.” If a reason for 
such a conclusion is asked for, the only attempt ever made 
to satisfy the enquirer is entiiely unsatisfactory and un¬ 
enlightening. They tell us that as the sun, the moon, and 
the planets are globular, therefore the Earth must be globu¬ 
lar. But this is contrary to the teaching of the Bible, which 
states that the Earth is “ fixed,” and that the heavenly 
bodies were made to give light to our Earth, and to divide 
the light from the darkness, and to rule over the day and 
over the night. Also the true order of Creation is given in 
the Second Commandment,which states that Heaven is above , 
the Earth beneath, and water under the Earth. 

These statements from Holy Writ, which agree with the evi¬ 
dence of our God-given senses, and by which we behold the 
fact that the Bible account of Creation is true, precludes the 
possibility of our acceptance of the unscriptural and wildly 
romantic teaching presented to us by modern scientists. 

Again, we used to be told that ships having sailed round 
the world proved it to be globe, but, as it has already been 
shown, this circumnavigation “ proof” has been exploded. 

It also seems that, the “ shadow of the Earth upon the 
Moon ” proof, is on its last legs ; and we hope ere long to see 
the open admission that the periodical lunar eclipse (even as 
it has been admitted regarding circular sailing) is “ no proof 
of the Earth’s globularity ” printed in books for instructing 
the young. For at last our opponents are beginning to 
realize that the fact of the sun and the moon having been 
both seen above the horizon at the time when a lunar eclipse 
occurred proves, even from their own standpoint, that it is 
notxhe shadow of the earth which causes the so-called eclipse 
of the moon. 

The fact that both sun and moon have been seen above 
the horizon at the time of a lunar eclipse entirely demolishes 
the possibility of the shadow of the Earth being thrown upon 

U cu 


the moon, even from the globular standpoint, as the following 
diagram will show. 

If the sun and moon have ever been seen above the hori¬ 
zon at the same time during an eclipse ot the moon, it is a 
proof that it is not the shadow of the Earth which eclipses 
the moon. Let A be the Earth and its horizon, and let B 
be the moon and C the sun. Now it is evident that any 
shadow cast by A could not fall upon B but would fall upon 
D, because shadows always fall directly opposite to the light, 
and as the light comes from C to A the shadow from A could 
not fall upon B but must be cast towards D. Therefore an 
eclipse of the moon under such condition proves that the 
Earth cannot be a globe. 

We, pianists, cannot for a moment admit that it is the 
shadow of the Earth which is cast upon the moon, for we 
deny that the Earth is a heavenly body. We may not be able 
to say what this shadow is with certainty—further than that 
it may be caused by a dark body coming between the moon 
and an observer on the Earth, or by the moon being involved 
in a mass of thick vapour revolving around and above the 
Earth in opposition to the sun, as taught distinctly by 
“ Zetetes.” But we are not above saying that “how” 
or “why” God darkens or eclipses the moon may be as 
“ inexplicable a mystery to us as is the growth of a blade of 
grass or, as our Lord said regarding His Holy Spirit, we 
“cannot tell whence it cometh, or whither it goeth, and so 
is every one that is born of the Spirit.” 

To proceed with our cursory glance at the nature and 
bearings of the Romance of Modern Science: regarding the 
Earth’s supposed motions, we cannot enquire into the proofs 
of these motions for the simple reason that no real proofs are 
ever offered. We are required by our fellow mortals to be¬ 
lieve, in contradiction to the evidence of our senses (under 
the penalty of being jeered at, and called cranks) that the 
Earth has a number of different motions, the two principal 


of which being its “ axial” and “ rotatary ” movements ; and 
yet, not a single fact or proof is ever offered in support of 
such far-fetched and unreasonable suppositions save that 
which the cult term “ the pendulum proof,” which although 
no proof at all we must here discuss. 

The Pendulum Proof 

is a romance of science, , 

This pendulum , modern scientists tell us, affords a visible 
proof that we are living on a whirling globe which, according 
to a “Work on Science” now before me, is spinning upon 
its so-called axis at the rate of over 1,000. miles an hour at the 
Equator • and, in addition other motions, is rushing on an 
everlasting tour round the sun (the diameter of which is said 
to be 883,000 miles, and its weight 354,936 times gieatei 
than the Earth from which it is said to be about 93,000,000 
miles distant,) at the rate of over 1,000 miles per minute. 
Now to prove that the Earth really has all these motions a 
pendulum is suspended at the show ; the showman sets it in 
motion, and bids the gaping world of thoughtless men and 
women to “behold a proof” that we are living on,a whirling 
crlobe which is rushing away through space ! 




We believe, with all due deference to the pendulum, and 
its proprietor, that it proves nothing but the craftiness of 
the inventor of it ; and we describe the show and showman 
as deceptions. A thing so childish as this “pendulum 
proof” is one of the most simple and ridiculous attempts to 
gull the public that could be conceived. 

We will quote a recent newspaper report concerning the 
pendulum, as follows : “ The great pendulum which had been 
hung by the Astronomical Society of France to demonstrate 
by its oscillations the rotation of the globe, was to-day set 
in movement at an inaugural ceremony, presided over by 
M. Chaumie, Minister of Public Instruction. The President 
of the Republic was represented by Commandant Roulet, 
and delegations from the Polytechnic and Normal Schools 
were also present. The official personages were received by 
M. Poincare, member of the Institute and of the Bureau of 
Longitudes, and M. Camille Flammarion, President of the 
Astronomical Society. They were supported by numerous 
other savants, mathematicians, astronomers, &c. 

“ M. Camille Flammarion, after reminding his hearers that 
it was in 1661 that the demonstration was first made in 
Florence by Galileo ; referred, at considerable length, to the 
memorable experiment made in France by Foucault half a 
century ago, and of which the present was a repetition. 
M. Chaumie commented on the technical explanations given 
by the astronomer; and then, by burning with a match the 
string which held it, freed the pendulum, which commenced 
its majestic oscillations, the stylet marking clearly its pass¬ 
age over the sand.” 

It has been said that the pendulum experiment proves 
the rotation of the Earth, but this is quite impossible, for one 
pendulum turns one way ; and sometimes, another pendulum 
turns in the opposite direction. Now we ask does the Earth 
rotate in opposite directions at different places at one and 
the same time ? We should like to know. Perhaps the 
experimenters will kindly enlighten us on this point. 

The earth’s alleged motion became a leading topic among 
scientists in the year of the Great Exhibition (1851). The 
Literary Gazette in that year referred to the averment that 
Galileo had experimented with a pendulum in its simplest 
form : a weight hanging by a thread to a fixed point. He 
is said to have discovered the law of isochronous ( i.e., equal 



in time) vibrations. Foucault was induced, by certain re¬ 
flections, to repeat Galileo’s experiments in the cellar of his 
mother’s house in Paris ; and was said to have proved an 
immediate and visible demonstration of the earth’s rotation. 
Suppose the pendulum be set moving in a vertical plane from 
N to S, the plane in which it vibrates would appear to be 
stationary ; however, it is said that M. Foucault, the physicist, 
showed that the plane is itself slowly moving round the 
fixed point as a centre in a direction contrary to the earth’s 
rotation, i.e., with the apparent heavens E to W. If a “pointer” 
be attached to the weight of a pendulum suspended by a long 
and fine wire, capable of turning round in all directions and 
nearly in contact with the floor of a room, the line which 
this pointer appears to trace on the ground, and which may 
easily be followed by a chalk mark, will be found to be slowly, 
but visibly, turning round like the hand of a watch dial. 

As the result of the foregoing averments it was suggested 
that further observations should be carried out, and accord¬ 
ingly we note that: 

“ A number of prominent scientists and literateurs of 
Paris were invited to see the earth revolve ; but what they 
saw was the pendulum move." 

“ There is an actual, observable, and measureable de¬ 
viation of the plane of oscillation ; the pendulum (not the 
floor)—not the earth—moves. But a diurnal revolution 
does produce the deviation ; it is the revolution of the 

“ The solar sweep completes the cycle of vibration of 
the pendulum in 24 hours.” 

We have no faith in the general tenets of the paper from 
which we have taken the above. However, it was forwarded 
to us, and we would now remind our readers (as we are apt 
to remind our hearers) that at times we find truth asserting 
itself where we least expected it to exist. Yet the 
truth comes out sometimes, and (as the writer owns) what 
the people saw was the movement of the pendulum ; but 
what the astronomers wished them to see was the movement 
of the earth. 

It is a forlorn hope ! 

The pendulum experiment was attempted some years ago 
with most unique apparatus by an uncle of the present 
Viscount Cross, G.C.B., G.C.S.I., at his residence on the 



Quantock Hills, near the spot where Julius Caesar pitched 
his camp after he began his invasion of Britain 55 years B.C., 
making use of a Latin exclamation, signifying : “ How much 
can be seen from this spot ! ” The abbreviated Latinism, 

“ Qauntum abhoc,” in after years suggested the place-name, 

“ Quantock.” 

Here, when electricity as an illuminant had not been 
utilized, Mr. Cross_ encircled his orchard with electric wires 
and electrified the fruit trees in such a way that the produce 
was raised 50 per cent, in value. Though Mr. Cross was in 
advance of the age he could not accept the theory that the 
Earth moves at the rate of 19 miles per second. 

Before accepting the Foucault pendulum deduction he 
determined to carry out the experiment for himself—choos- 
the closing days of the year when (according to what we 
have been taught) the yearly cycle and the earth’s “turn 
over” are completed and another annual cycle and “turn 
over ” begin again. The period of watching and taking notes 
of the observations extended over a week, and the only 
result was a slight declination from the exact horizontal 
position towards the pointer.* 

In the last named experiment a gravimeter was used for 
ascertaining what scientists designate specific gravity—the 
globe pendulum being attached thereto by means of the 
horizontal and attachment bar. 

A trocheameter was used for the purpose of registering 
and determining the direction of the circuit in which the 
pendulum might move ; the combined prismatic compass and 
clinometer being used in connection with the spirit-level, the 
arrangment being so requisitioned in order to accentuate a 
desiderated tremulous motion of the earth. 

With all the apparati referred to in the foregoing, it was 
evident that if the Earth rotates 19 miles in a second a very 
perceptible agitation would have been observable, instead 
of a temporary declination in all probability caused by the 
cross-bar arrangement being hung slightly out of the per¬ 
pendicular. At the close of the experiment Mr. Cross said: 
“ I have found no proof, by actual observation, that the Earth 
moves round the sun. I have not seen the earth move.” 

The astronomers would give a great deal to be able to 
exhibit the motion of the Earth. They know they cannot 
prove such motion ; and so they try to make the unwary 

*A diagram to have been printed here was not ready at time of going to press. 



believe they see that motion indirectly in the motion of a 
swinging pendulum. It shows that they are hard pressed 
for convincing evidence when they resort to fallacious proofs. 

The pendulum performance might fitly be named, “ The 
live lion stuffed with straw.” 

If the Earth had the terrible motions attributed to it, there 
would be some sensible effects of such motions. But we 
neither feel the motion, see it, nor hear it. And how 
people can stand watching the pendulum vibrate, and think 
that they are seeing a proof of the motion of the Earth al¬ 
most passes comprehension. They are, however, brought 
up to believe it, and it is thought to be “scientific’ 1 to be¬ 
lieve what the astronomers teach. This kind of belief is well 
defined by Mark Twain’s school-boy, who said, “ Faith is 
believing what you know ain’t so.” But when men professing 
to be Christians believe such fallacies, which they know to be 
not only contrary to the testimony of our senses, but contrary 
to the Word of God, we cannot but grieve to think how they 
have been misled to put more faith in what is called “ science ” 
than in the statements of God’s Word and the evidence of 
their God-given senses. 

It is all the more sad when a writer like the Editor of 
Past and Future ., (who in some things upholds Bible teaching, 
goes out of his way to tell us that his astronomy is not that 
of the Bible, but that of the astronomers, which contradicts 
Holy Writ. I pray that the time is not far distant when all 
Christians will learn the unreasonableness of not believing 
in the evidence of their own God-given senses, and in the 
Word of God the Creator regarding His own account of His 
own Creation. 

The Jews all ought also to believe in the Mosaic account of 
Creation and the Word of the Lord,delivered to them through 
Moses. We regret that they have not the additional evid¬ 
ence through Jesus the Christ, who endorsed the teaching 
of Moses and the Prophets. For alas ! they have not yet 
nationally accepted the Lord of Life as their Redeemer. 

Therefore, earnestly beseeching both Christians and Jews 
to discard The Romance of Science , I will, before leaving 
this part of the subject, ask : If the Earth moves, How is it 
that the motion cannot start a pendulum swinging—if it is 
stationary to begin with ? There surely ought to be no such 

thing anywhere as a stationary pendulum. 



I 68 

The fallacy of the globular idea is brought into bold relief 
and made vividly palpable if vve picture a man having taken 
a journey upon this supposed “ globe ” from N to E, which 
is estimated to be a distance of about 6,250 miles. Accord¬ 
ing to the hypothecated globular theory it will be seen that 
the voyager will have fallen over 3,900 miles—the fall being 
from North to East. This, on a perfect sphere, represents 
about f-ths of the quoted distance. From N to S this huge 
fall would be further accentuated, and would thus illustrate in 
a deeper sense the fallacious nature of the globular supposition 
(to be continued D. V.) 


The preceding article by the Ed., and the one follozving by 
“ Zetetes ,” are taken from M.SS. which they arc preparing 
as joint authors of a book. The articles are printed here to 
give our readers some idea oj the contents of the book , which 
we shall shortly have published , incorporating with it some 
articles from “ The Earthf ’ which deserve printing in a more 
permanent form. We shall be glad to receive orders for the 
book as soon as we get it in the press, which toe trust will be 
very, shortly. 





A Canal Experiment. 

As the very foundation of modern astronomy rests on the 
assumption that we are living on a whirling globe, all sorts 
of devices are resorted to to support the idea of the earth’s 

After having demolished some of the best “ proofs ” it is 
surely not necessary to examine and review every statement 
offered in support of this modern and absurd fallacy. But 
we will briefly refer to one or two others before going on to 
examine the question of the Earth’s supposed motions. 

We are informed that the Earth’s curvature could be 
“ proved ” by three poles placed in a straight line ; and such 
an experiment was tried in a noted instance upon the Bed¬ 
ford Canal, Cambridgeshire. Our examination of this 
“proof” may throw some light upon the “ trick” which was 
then supposed to win a wager. 

We shall, however, quote again from Mr. Gregory’s book, 
published in 1892, p. 110. 

“ If three poles of exactly the same height be placed in a line the 
middle one always appears higher than the other two outer ones. Let. 
three poles be fixed in line with their tops cut off at exactly the same 
height above some level surface (level mind you !), such as the surface 
of a canal, then, if a telescope is sighted along the first to the third pole 
the top of the middle pole -unit appear above the line joining the tops of 
the two outer ones. The cause of this is the curvature of the Earth’s 
surface, and if the experiment can be repeated (why cannot it ?) in various 
parts of the Earth, and (“ if”) it was found that the curvature was every¬ 
where the same, this would prove that the Earth’s form is globular, and 
an approximate determination of its size could be obtained. It is found 
that the middle pole rises 8 inches above the line joining the two outer 
when the distance between each pole is a mile.” 

This is a very specious paragraph. It reads well, and an 
unsuspecting reader might easier be misled by it. But let 
us examine it a little, and it will be “found to be wholly 

The writer of the paragraph quoted does not say that such 
an experiment had been tried and that the result was found 
to be what he said it “ would ” be if so tried. But in the 
style of most modern astronomers he jumps from the sub- 



junctive, or hypothetical, mood to the positive, or indicative 
mood, and says : “ If” three equal poles “ be placed in a 
line,” meaning I suppose in a straight line, “the middle one 
always appears higher than the other two outer ones. Of 
course, “ if the middle pole is higher, and if it be left in its 
position, it “ always ” will appear so ; but this is not what 
Mr. G. meant to say. We may guess his meaning though 
his words do not express it. But were he to condescend to 
give particulars as to time and place others might try the 
same experiment, and the trick might be found out. But 
we think we can expose it as it is. 

Three poles have to be “ fixed in line with their tops cut 
off at exactly the same height above some level surface.” 
Now, mind! their tops must be “cut off.” Good! It 
is, therefore, self-evident that if the equal poles are 
fixed on a “level surface” at “exactly the same height,” 
one pole cannot be higher than another ; not even 8 inches. 
If they appear otherwise the poles could not have been 
fixed at “ exactly the same height ” ! Yet the writer says . 

“ If a telescope is sighted along the first to the third, the 
middle pole “ will ” appear higher. The language is vague. 
The question is, does it appear higher, or does it not ? Our 
scientist says it “will.” Well, we shall see soon whether 
it “ will ” or no ; though 8 inches in a mile cannot appear 

In the meantime we ask, what does he mean by placing 
the telescope “ along the first ” pole ? This pole like the 
others, is upright and perpendicular to the horizon ; how 
then can the telescope be sighted “ along ” the top of it ? 
This is where the trick comes in ! If you remove the fii st 
pole and put the telescope in its place, so as to “ sight ” only 
the other two, or if you rest the telescope on the top of 
the first pole, the middle one may appear higher than the 
third ; because the third being further away, looks perspec- 
tively less than the middle one which is a mile nearer. 
Without asking how there can be a middle pole of two, 
if you remove the telescope some distance away fiom the 
first pole, and look over or along the tops of all the three 
poles then they will be “ found ” to be in the same straight 
line. And if the telescope be properly adjusted so as to 
prevent the “ error of collimation ” the middle pole will not 
be found 8 inches higher than the other two. This can be 



J t _ 

tested by experiment; but we shall proceed to prove it by 
the following diagram. 

Diagram VIII. 

Let A, B, C, represent three equal poles placed at any 
convenient and equal distances apart, in a direct line upon 
the Earth s supposed curved surface—A D. Then, according 
to the theory of our astronomical friend the top of the middle 
pole (B) will be “ found ” to be higher than either of the 
poles at A and C, as in diagram 8. 

Let us suppose for argument’s sake that the pole B has 
been “ found ” to be higher than the pole C. Now without 
removing any of the three poles A, B, C, let us add another 
pole—D—at exactly the same distance as the others. Ig¬ 
noring pole A, let the telescope be removed to the pole B, 
and let it be placed in the same relative position to B as it 
was to A. Join the tops of B and D to represent their false 
line of sight. It will now be seen that C is the middle pole of 
the three, B, C, D ; and by the same “ line of reasoning ” the 
top of the middle pole—C—will be “found” to be higher 
than either of the poles D and B. But by this “ line of 
reasoning” we have already “proved” that the pole B was 
higher than the pole C, and now we “ prove,” in the same 
way, that pole C is higher than pole B ! That is, the pole 
B the middle pole experimented upon, at the same time is 
both higher and lower than the outer pole (C), which is ab¬ 
surd ! Wherefore the pole B is NOT higher than the pole 
C, but exactly the same height above the same level surface”; 
and therefore this experiment does not “ prove that the 
Earth’s form is globular.” 

So that our astronomical friend has made at least two 
gross mis-statements here—one as to a fact, and the other 
as to the conclusion to be drawn from that supposed fact. 


(i) “ The middle pole will (not) appear above the line join¬ 
ing the tops of the two outer ones,” if the experiment be 
properly conducted ; and, (2) “ the cause of this is (not) the 
curvature of the Earth’s surface,” for the mere assumption 
of the Earth’s curvature cannot be the “ cause ” of anything, 
that is of anything found in Nature. 

But stop ! It may be—yes, it is—the “ cause ” of other¬ 
wise intelligent men making mis-statements, false state¬ 
ments, and misrepresentations in support of an absurd 
theory, which its founder confessed was “feigned” for quite 
another purpose than for strict truth and integrity ; for as 
we have now abundantly shown, the effort to support this 
superstitious system causes its advocates to depart alike from 

Diagram IX. 


( Copied Rom Rovm. Header Standard Yi) 

This is further illustrated by their diagrams of ships at 
sea, and the way they make them climb over a supposed 
hill of water. 

The foregoing diagrams are specimens of the false per¬ 
spective given in astronomical works and school books. 
They are so flagrant as to need no refutation. The first ship 
is seldom placed on the “ top” of the diagram, but a little to 
one side, so that it will appear to rise first before it is made 
to descend on the other side of the “ offing.” The first 
ship, like the first pole should be placed on the “top” of 
the diagram, and the line of sight should be tangential 
to the place of observation ; then instead of a rise over a 
convex surface we should see the next pole, or ship, de¬ 



scending at once the awful decline. But then this 
would be to expose the “ trick,” of which no doubt the 
better class of astronomers are fully aware ; yet none of them 
hitherto have had the courage to denounce the deception 
practised by their supporters. This is left for others. 

That it may be seen we are not alone in speaking thus 
plainly, we will quote, from Things to Come , part of an ad¬ 
dress by Mr. Thomas A. Edison, originally printed in Sug¬ 
gestive Therapeutics , he says : 

“There are more frauds in modern science than anywhere else. 

Take a whole pile of them that I could name, and you will find uncer¬ 
tainty, if not imposition, in half of what they stare as scientific truth. 
They have time and again set down experiments as done by them, curious 
out of the wav experiments that they never did, and upon which they 
have founded so-called scientific truths. I have been thrown off my 
track often bv them, and for months at a time. Try the experiment 
yourself and you will find the result altogether different.” 

Such is the testimony of a practical scientist and experi¬ 
menter, and we know his testimony is true as regards 
theoretical astronomy. We could quote other testimonies, 
but as we have already given proof that such “frauds” are 
practised, we think it unnecessary to do so here. 



By “ Rectangle .” 

(continued from p. 143.) 

In concluding this part of our researches, we quote the 
following from the Daily Chronicle of 14th January, 1893. 

“A Geological Blunder.” 

“ There is in Nature an article by a French writer on 
Sir Archibald Geikie, Director-General of the Geological 
Survey, which is just now causing a good deal of talk 
amongst English men of science. Of course nobody is 
surprised at the fulsomeness of M. de Lapparent’s eulogy. 
As Nattire seems to exist for pushing the great official 



scientific syndicate of Huxley, Hooker, Geikie and Co., 
Limited—very strictly limited—which may be said to ‘run ’ 
science in England, M. de Lapparent would not probably 
have been permitted to write anything about a member of 
it unless it was fulsome. What has really amazed people 
is the audacity with which a famous historic bungle on 
the part of the Geological Survey is glossed over, and the 
Director-General not only credited with the work of those 
who exposed and corrected it, to his utter discomforture, 
but actually covered with laurels for thus winning one of 
the most glorious scientific conquests of the century. The 
whole thing is delightfully characteristic of State-endowed 
science in England. If you are one of the official syn¬ 
dicate who ‘ run ’ it, you may blunder with impunity and 
make your country ridiculous at the taxpayer’s expense. 
Scientific men who can correct you shrink from the task. 
They know that the syndicate can boycott them, and by in¬ 
trigue keep them out of every honour and profit, and that 
the syndicate’s satellites can write and shout down every¬ 
where independent non-official critics. They also know 
that if, perchance, some particular intrepid person does 
succeed in exposing one of this syndicate, they can always, 
by the same means—after the public has forgotten the 
incident—suppress him, and boldly appropriate to them¬ 
selves the credit of his work. 

“ The geological secret of the Highlands, with the un¬ 
locking of which Sir Archibald Geikie is now credited, 
was really made a puzzle by the blundering of the Geo¬ 
graphical Survey and Director-General Sir Roderick 
Murchison—and famous courtier and ‘society’ geologist 
of the last generation. In the Highlands he saw gneisses 
and ordinary crystalline schists resting on Silurian strata, 
and he foolishly held the sequence to be quite normal. 
The schists, he would have it, were not archaic formations, 
but only meta-morphosed Silurian deposits. He also 
held that primitive gneiss was not part of the molten crust 
of the globe , but only sediments of sand and mud altered 
by intense pressure and heat. Murchison, not to put too 
fine a point on it, ‘ bounced ’ everybody into accepting this 
absurd theory, and the whole forces of the Geological 
Survey, with its official and social influence, together with 
the unscrupulous power of the official syndicate which 



then, as now jobbed science wherever it had a state en¬ 
dowment, were spent in perpetuating the blunder and 
blasting the scientific reputation of whoever scoffed at it. 
The late Dr. Nicol, Professor of Natural History in Aber¬ 
deen, proved that Murchison and the Survey were wholly 
wrong , his proof being as complete as the existing state 
of science allowed. When he died, Dr. Alleyne Nicholson 
took the same side, and for years, in relation to this grand 
problem, it was Aberdeen University against the world. 

.In shouting the last word no voice has been louder 

than Sir Archibald Geikie's. It is therefore diverting to 
find his official biographer stating in Nature that all the 
time he was wrestling in foro conscientice with doubts as 
to the soundness of the official position, and that finally 
‘ his love of truth ’ prompted him to order a re-survey 
of the whole Highland region. In plain English, the 
taxpayer, having had to pay for Murchison’s bungling 
survey, was, because of his successor’s ‘ love of truth,’ to 
enjoy the luxury of paying over again to correct it. 

“ The real truth, however, is this :—When it was sup¬ 
posed that the Aberdonians were finally crushed, there 
arose in England a young geologist called Lapworth, who 
had the courage to revise the whole controversy and take 
sides with the Aberdeen school. As he developed an 
extraordinary genius for stratigraphy he not only broke 
to pieces the official work of the Geographical Survey in 
the Highlands, but by revealing the true secret of the 
structure of that perplexing region, he played havoc with 
the Murchisons and the Geikies and all their satellites, 
convicting them of bungling and covering them with 

“ Nature, in fact, in these parts had suffered from a much 
more powerful emetic than Murchison imagined, and 
when bits of the primitive crust of the GLOBE were thrown 
up and pushed on the top of more recent deposits, Mur¬ 
chison jumped to the conclusion that they were of later 
date than what they lay on. It was a terrible blunder, 
as the Aberdeen men persistently held, and we do not 
wonder that Sir Archibald Geikie, who rose to place and 
power by defending it, is anxious to have his connection 
with it veiled by a friendly hand. But it is rather out¬ 
rageous for the friendly hand to give him the credit of 



conceding the very error which he defended to the last 
gasp, and deprive Professor Lapworth of the honour of 
having banished it from science. One of the most di¬ 
verting things, however, in the article in Nature is that 
Sir Archibald Geikie is belauded because, when frightened 
by the stir Professor Lapworth made in 1883, he was 
fain to send his surveyors to go over the Highlands again 
—he, as their official chief, ordered them “ to divest 
themselves of any prepossession in favour of published views , 
and to map out the actual facts.’ Old Colin Campbell, 
when he objected to the institution of the Victoria Cross, 
said it was as absurd to decorate a soldier for being brave 
as a woman for being virtuous. He did not foresee a 
still greater absurdity—that of eulogizing a man of science 
because he instructed his assistants to tell the truth when 
conducting an investigation into his own blunders.” ( Italics 
ours.) —From the Daily Chronicle , Saturday, Jan. 14, 1893. 

And in a further issue the same paper says : 

“ Sir Archibald Geikie, Director-General of the Geo¬ 
logical Survey, has at last taken notice—in Nature , we 
need hardly say—of our article condemning the attempt 
to give the Survey the credit of some of the most remark¬ 
able discoveries of the age which have really been made 
by men unaided by the State, and toiling for daily bread 
as teachers of science. We had heard something that 
caused us to expose this scandal. The fact is the official 
ring of State-endowed science not content with jobbing 
the Royal Society and its distinctions, as their critics have 
been showing in the Times , are meditating a raid upon 
the taxpayer. They want more money, and as a prelim¬ 
inary step their official organ Nature of course begins to 
1 boom ’ their work and reputations. This is a good old 
game. The only novelty in the situation is that a daily 
newspaper, for the first time in history ventured to show 
it up. We do not desire to be harsh to the illustrious 
scientists who edit Nature. It is the duty of all official 
organs to make big men out of small material. But when 
they begin to do this by coolly confiscating the achieve¬ 
ments of private and independent workers for one of the 
managing partners in the great firm of Huxley, Geikie, 
Dyer & Co., limited, we thought it time to protest. 


I 77 

The letters that have been appearing in the Times make 
some funny revelations about the way the Royal Society 
is ‘ worked.’ Sir Archibald Geikie’s defence suggests that 
if the Times only followed up the scented it would 
show its readers plenty of sport. We ourselves would 
make no objection to a vote of money in aid of researches 
into the ‘frank’ and ‘practical’ manner in which, and the 
terms on which , the official gang of science frequently 
‘ acknowledge ’ the achievements of young outsiders.” — 
Daily Chronicle , Feb. 2, 1893. 

(to be continued.) 


All things that are moving away from us, or that we are 
leaving behind, begin to get less, and are lost to sight, 
when they reach a distance from us of 2,000 times their own 

Watch a railway train and see it diminish until it becomes 
the size of a man’s hat, and probably not a mile away, and 
certainly by the time it is two miles away it will be lost 
to sight, although a telescopewill restore it. This we are 
told is from the well known principle mentioned above. 

The other day I watched a large bird flying, and when it 
got about a quarter of a mile away it became the size of a 
common house fly which was upon the pane of the window 
through which 1 was looking, and in a few seconds it was 
entirely lost to view. 

Again, I saw a ship at sea—-it was sailing close to the 
shore, which was as near as possible the same height as the 
ship (say one hundred feet)—and I watched and noticed that 
both the ship and the shore were reduced in height to the 
extent of one third. The hull of the vessel was entirely 
gone from sight, and of course one third of the coast could 
not be seen—the portion that was gone was, of necessity, 
the lower part. On looking again I found that two-thirds 
of the height, both of the ship and shore, had gone, and, 
still watching, saw both disappear at exactly the same time. 


Now we know what the astronomers say, on losing sight 
of the ship’s hull, but can they say about the shore, “ that 
the curvature of the earth hid it” ? Well, I will leave them 
to say it again, for they have said many things quite as 
foolish and untrue. 

If any person desires to know the truth as to whether 
there is any curvature or not, he has only to fix his eye 
upon two vessels at sea—ten or twelve miles apart—between 
those two vessels there ought to be a curvature of many 
yards, but with a good telescope and spirit level he will not 
be able to detect an inch. 

Then again, the datum line on railways ought to convince 
every searcher for the truth that the earth has no curvature. 
Without a datum line no railway has been laid, and railways 
have been made thousands of miles in extent without tracing 
an inch of curvature. 

In Great Britain no plans for erecting buildings in con¬ 
nection with railways, nor for the construction of railways, 
that allows for the Earth’s curvature will be accepted by 
Parliamentary Committees. 

And it is a fact generally known that the river Nile, for 
several thousand miles, has no fall beyond that of a foot or 
six inches. 




On February 7th, 1903, at the age of 93 years, died Mr. 
James Glaisher, F.R.S., the meteorologist, who once held 
many important positions in scientific circles. 

For avowed scientific purposes he made 28 ascents in bal¬ 
loons between the 17th July, 1862, and 26th May, 1866, 
the most memorable of which was that of the 5th September, 
1862, in company with the skilful aeronaut Mr. Coxwell, 
when an altitude of 37,000 feet—or seven miles—was reached. 
This voyage nearly cost both gentlemen their lives. 

In Mr. Glaisher’s original record of this premier ascent, 
he, in effect, stated that at the altitude of 6 miles the Earth 



appeared to be like a huge bowl, with the edges (horizon) 
200 miles away on every hand, and on a dead level with the 
car of the balloon. In another part of the record he states: 
“ all perception of comparative altitudes of objects, on or 
near the ground is lost ; houses, trees, the undulations of 
the country, etc., are all reduced to one level ; everything, 
in fact, seems to be on the same level ; and the whole has 
the appearance of a plane. Everything seen looking down¬ 
wards from a balloon, including the clouds, seems projected 
upon one visible plane beneath.” 

Again, he states : “ Always, however great the height of 
the balloon, when I have seen the horizon, it has appeared 
to be on the level of the car.” Also, “ I have never seen 
any part of the surface of the Earth—from a balloon—other 
than as a plane.” 

Corroborative accounts by all other aeronauts, without 
exception, of the above PLANE FACT could be referred 
to if necessary, but the extracts given should be quite 
sufficient to convince any honest thinker, that balloonists 
have the best possible grounds for doubting the assumed 
sphericity of the world of land and water ; yet they have not 
the honesty or courage to admit they have been misled, and 
that that which they see, not only seems and appears so, 
but is part of the vast Plane of The World. 

The magnificent distant horizon, and the 6-mile depth 
under the car, observed by Mr. Glaisher, should convince 
anyone outside a lunatic asylum, that if the World be a 
globe, the observer, under the conditions at such an altitude, 
must have had to Look down to his horizon ; but as anything 
so absurd was not and cannot be done by anyone at any 
elevation when looking across the sea, or any large expanse 
of land, the only conclusion to be arrived at is that the 
World is NOT a globe. 

Without doubt, had Mr. Glaisher been nearer 20 than 66 
years of age, and had he possessed the telescopic eyes of a 
South African Boer, or a Bedouin, he would have seen nearly 
as far again as he did ; in fact his view was only limited by 
the strength of his vision, as the other conditions recorded 
were favourable. 

To the lasting disgrace of the so-called scientific world 
they allowed some deluded person or persons to attempt to 



garble and modify Mr. Glaisher’s original straight-forward 
account some time after publication; they seeing no doubt 
that such did not square with the globular theory ; but as 
this is on a par with the ostrich burying its head in the 
sand it need not trouble truth-seekers. 

Before concluding this notice it may be well to remember 
that every observer makes his own horizon, which on being 
approached continuously recedes, and the limit to which this 
imaginary line may be seen varies as much under certain 
air and other conditions as most people’s eyes vary in 
strength. The school-men infer that this varying line is a 
fixture, or as if it were an apex to a following downward 
curve ; this we know by innumerable demonstrations made 
from beaches, vessels, cliffs, and other elevations, and bal¬ 
loons, is absolutely false. And yet the vanishing ship trick 
is still chattered about, not only by children at school but 
by grown-up people who think they are educated. 

We are certain that if any globe-deluded observers, from 
any position, could see a portion of the supposed globe, by 
having to look down to their horizon in the slightest degree, 
the world would soon hear of it, and the professors would 
rip their gowns for joy, and hug each other. But the poor 
creatures will never have this satisfaction ; so it is useless 
for them to save up their strength and gowns in anticipation 
of such an impossibility. 

We know it is impossible to see that which is non-existent, 
and the evidence of our senses is against such rubbish as 
the World being a planet ; against it being a globe ; against 
its supposed various fearful motions ; against its vast oceans 
being anything so unnatural as convex ; in fact, dead against 
all the whimsical, sophistical, and God-dishonouring ideas 
and inventions, by which Modern Elementary Theoretical 
Science attempts to establish all such scatter-brain ab¬ 

And now, Mr. Glaisher, with due respect, you are wished 
farewell bv 






At Eddy Wood Institute, Siiorncliffe. 

Is the solar system the clock of the Bible ? 

The question before you may be somewhat startling to 
some, and I dare say I am right in thinking that there are 
only a few present who would give an unhesitating answer ; 
nevertheless, there are a growing number of persons scattered 
throughout the various denominations of the world, who, if 
asked the question, would at once give a definite answer, 
and that in the affirmative. 

In my rambles in the East I have come across stone mon¬ 
uments and sundials, some of which are crumbling to decay, 
showing that in days long gone by, the knowledge of the 
constellations and the movements of the sun, moon, and 
planets was of a very high order. 

In common with some here, I have also had the sadness 
to see crowds, numbering many thousands, who would plunge 
into the rivers, or perform some other act of worship, on 
the signal from a leading priest who would be watching for 
the first indication of an expected eclipse, or rising of the 
sun, moon, or some particular star or planet. 

While heathenism has debased the use and knowledge of 
astronomy, Christianity at large has lost its value as a support 
of God’s Word, His glory, and His power. 

Genesis i. i, 2 (idiomatic translation).—You notice the 
marked difference between the text of the A.V., which, grand 
as it is, has lost much of the original thought with which it 
was invested. Here we have revealed to us the condition 
of things when God commenced to bring order out of dis¬ 
order, and make the Earth habitable for man and the lower 

Here are the proofs of a common start of the motion, as 
we see it to-day, of the solar system. We shall enlarge on 
a few of them as time permits. 

I hese rings, of various sizes, represent the lines of time 
which never can meet, but which can be positively traced 
back to a common starting point. All are methods that can 


be used to demonstrate that the present age commenced 
5,901 years ago. 

Does the sun celebrate its birthday ? Yes, and keeps it 
up four days. It commenced its present course by obser¬ 
ving a perfect sideral day, which is repeated every 20th of 
September, the exact commencement of each year. On the 
23rd the sun enters Libra at the autumnal equinox ; then 
the Earth has day and night equal everywhere. I may here 
say that the sideral day is not one of 24 hours as it is in 
the solar day, but 23 hours, 56 minutes, 4 seconds ; the latter 
being the time it takes for any star to leave and return to 
the same place overhead the next night. The difference 
being that the sun has progressed about one degree on its 
journey round the Earth. The sun’s starting point is also 
a beautiful geometrical as well as an astronomical figure. 

Now who was the prime mover in all this wondrous per¬ 
fection ? We have seen how Elohim brooded on the face 
of the deep. Are we left in doubt as to who is intended ? 
No, certainly not. 

This is what we received by revelation 4,000 years after 
the event. This wonderful being, Jesus Christ, Who in the 
secret councils of the Godhead planned this age with all its 
wonders, and with the power of the absolute and Almighty 
God in six literal days created the world, and at the same 
time called into being everything necessary for the blessing 
and welfare of mankind. This is the wondrous person who 
claims our allegiance ; is He not entitled to it ? Can we 
show our love sufficiently ? And yet impotent man has the 
audacity to leave Him out of his arguments, as if He were 
not ; as if He had not laid down His life for us. 

The cosmogony which contradicts the writings of Moses 
and does not take into consideration the presence of God’s 
Son at Creation, or rather organization of the present age, 
is learning gone mad, and cannot possibly stand the test 
of practical science. 

The term science is a word which scientific men sometimes 
use rightly, but it is at the same time a juggling word with 
which imaginative speculators label their effervescence, as 
we well know it means “ known facts ” and nothing more. 

If the traducers of Moses remained in the ranks of the 
speculators we should not have so much case for alarm, but 



the very greatest enemies of revelation have been and are 
in the fortress they should be defending ; where would the 
infidels of to-day have been but for the essays and reviews 
of 1862 ? They had the system of Voltaire to work upon. 
Infidelity was then (1862) provided with shot and shell, 
which have been hurled against the Pentateuch with unceas¬ 
ing energy. If we who love our king, our constitution, and 
our country, were posted in a fortress and we discovered 
one of our comrades drawing the explosive charges out of 
the shells, or sending messages to the enemy, giving in¬ 
formation as to what he considered to be weak spots in our 
position, would’nt we rush him off and have him placed in 
irons at once ? 

The statement of Moses, which I believe to have been 
given directly by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, not only 
states that the lights of heaven were for years, days, and 
seasons, but also for evidences (which is a better word than 
signs) ; what a great pity that their value as evidences has 
been somewhat obscured. Josephus tells us (b. i., p. 23) 
that the children of Seth, on being told by Adam that the 
Earth was to be destroyed both by fire and water, made two 
pillars, one of stone and one of brick, on which they de¬ 
scribed their knowledge of the heavenly bodies. I noticed 
that one of his translators, however, while admitting poss¬ 
ibilities, tries to nullify the effect of the original statement, 
and such editing has been going on from the beginning 
until now. 

When the Arch Higher Critic had not got his hands quite 
so full in early days, he conducted his business in person, 
using the body of the serpent as his medium. As time went 
on he employed emissaries both inside and outside the 
fortress. Jannes and Jambress were pretty active outside 
the fortress with Pharaoh, but the criticisms of those inside 
—Korah, Dathan, and Abiram—culminated in a frightful 

A week ago yesterday I was referring to the “ helps ” at 
the end of a Bible I have recently bought, and dropped 
across these words : "The history of Egypt has been traced 
back to more than 4,000 years B.C.” If it is not out of 
fashion to call a spade a spade, then that must be called a 
distortion of the truth ; for the object of such writers is to 


I 84 

belittle the sacred records ; for lack of knowledge it goes on 
to say that this is gathered from the writings of Manetho. 

Now we definitely know that if this Egyptian cat wor¬ 
shipper is correctly reproduced, he had very little knowledge 
of the truth of chronology or very little regard for it, for 
Eratosthenes, who lived at the same time, had charge of the 
great Alexandrian library and a far greater opportunity of 
knowing the truth, computed the length of the dynasties at 
3,000 years less than does Manetho, who it is known had 
no connected records to rely on and placed all the different 
dynasties consecutively instead of contemporaneously, as 
some of them are known to have been. 

Our modern critics repeat the old cry with changed names 
and it has become “ Away with Moses ! Give us Manetho.” 

Any would be chronologist who tries to make this age 
appear more than 5901 years must have a very prolific im¬ 
agination, for neither connected history nor the science of 
astronomy will support it. 

It will be well to state here that all planetary motion 
proves that that prince of chronologists, Archbishop Ussher, 
is perfectly correct, except for about eight years near the 
birth of Christ, and it seems almost a miracle that he was so 
wonderfully correct; one thing is certain he loved his Bible 
and was faithful to its teaching. 

To show that light can be quickly brought into existence, 
intensified, or removed as occasion requires, we have only 
to remember how easily we can control our artificial lights, 
whether they are stored in a solid, liquid, or gaseous form. 
Are we wise in doubting God’s ability to do what we our¬ 
selves can so easily do ? Can He who made the eye see 
not, or He that made the ear hear not ? 

God has not only honoured the Earth in an astronomical 
sense but also by sending His Son to die for our salvation, 
and having accomplished this work He is now seated at 
the right hand of the Father in heaven, in the glorified 
body which He took from this earth, leaving only His blood 
crying for vengeance on the one hand, and pointing to God’s 
love and forgiveness on the other. 

The eclipse cycle shows that three months must have 
preceded the first winter solstice. The first eclipse was a 
solar one, and occurred on the 1st January, o, A.M. The 


, 185 

life history of this solar eclipse, or the period of its recur¬ 
rence, is 1293 years. 

Here we have solar eclipses by progression, each one ob¬ 
scuring the sun less until the moon passes above the plane 
of the sun. 

A total solar eclipse can only be seen in a limited space 
of the Earth’s surface ; the one here represented would be 
seen above the equator; the moon’s shadow will touch the 
equator and extend a little to the north of it. 

The Eclipse Cycle.—Every eclipse term lasts 18 years 
and 11 or 10 days, after which it repeats itself. This is not 
the one called the METONIC CYCLE which was so well known 
to the ancients, who did good work with it. 

Then w'e have the brightest star of the heavens, called 
Sirus or the flaming dog star, which we now see rising early 
every evening and following the great constellation, Orion. 
This is a marvellous time-keeper. Every 162 years it rises 
a few minutes before the sun, every other star having dis¬ 
appeared before the rays of the sun almost half an hour 
before. The rising of Sirus synchronises with the rising of 
the Nile. We want no better chronological proof of the length 
of the present age than this wonderful star furnishes. 

Now we will consider the positions of the planets as they 
were recently situated for the first time since the Flood. 
The influence which we know they exert on each other pro¬ 
bably had something to do with the recent cataclysms and 
seismic phenomena. , 

Antediluvian Patriarchs.—We now come to one of the 
most startling chronological discoveries of modern times, 
viz. : that the record of our seven days has never been broken 
and has always existed since Creation. If all the wit and 
wisdom of all the sceptics could be concentrated into one 
representative he could not overturn or even touch with an 
insinuation the Lunar Solar Cycle and the way it proves the 
early writings of Moses. The records that are given of the 
Antediluvian Patriarchs gives the age of each when his son 
was born, this added to the age of Noah, 600, gives the year 
of the world when the Flood came. This we see was i6k6 

Lunar Cycle (7 years of 354 days).—The nine famous 
occurences of the Flood year, took place on the seventh, 


I 86 

or Sabbath Day (the day we now call Saturday), and the 
tables of figures in the above cycle are what anyone with the 
ordinary amount of intelligence may make out for himself. 
This subject is open for anyone to study, and I hope that 
something which has been said may cause you to think that 
it is possible after all that the “ Solar System is the Clock 
of the Bible.” 

Discussion followed, with some objections along the lines 
of the old bone and dust-heap theories. 

The audience were so well pleased that the speaker was 
invited to continue the subject in a fortnight’s time. This 
invitation was accepted. Some figures, by way of proof, will 
then be dealt with, and some lively discussion is promised. 
Colonial & Yry. Depdt, J. MARRIOTT, 

Shorncliffe. Sergt.-Maj. 


The Fatherhead of all truth and knowledge has given man 
an unerring law as a guide to understanding : 

“ Try all things : hold fast that which is good.” 

But man has given up God’s Word, which he considers 
is a time-worn old fashioned book, Unsuited to our advanced 
civilized era, and asks the question, how would it be possi¬ 
ble for a man to prove all things when it takes the whole 
of a life-time to thoroughly understand a small branch of 
modern science ? 

But surely if he would use reason he must perceive that 
upon all subjects there must be two sides ; and if we judge 
of these without looking into them for ourselves we neglect 
God’s greatest gift—our understanding. When we are 
ordered to “prove all things” it is not required that we 
should plunge into the various deep studies which man 
interests himself in, but that we should not take up any de¬ 
finite standpoint until we have thoroughly thrashed out the 
matter for ourselves. 



Nevertheless, it is the custom to read a book embracing 
certain theories, and instantly, haphazard to either, become 
partisans or violent opponents of the ideas set forth, and by 
so doing they level themselves to the animals who have no 

Locke says : “ Let no man, therefore, that would have a 
sight of what everyone pretends to be desirous of having a 
sight of—truth in its full extent—narrow and blind their 
own prospects. Let no man think there is truth but in the 
sciences that they study.” Another writer says : “ Man is 
a bigger fool than an animal on account of his greater 
cleverness.” And sometimes you will find that the cleverer 
the man the greater the bigot, which is accounted for by the 
substitution of cramming for education, and of hypothesis 
for proof. 

Again, Locke says : "We take our principles haphazard 
upon trust, and without ever having examined them, and 
then believe a whole system upon a presumption that they 
are true and solid, and what is all this but childish, shameful, 
senseless credulity ? ” 

Again, we must not let the theories which have been 
taught us in early youth have too much weight—which is a 
comman error, even among men who have been exception¬ 
ally well educated, and who seem to look upon dogmas 
taught them in infancy as almost divinely revealed facts. 

Nor should we allow reverence, nor any prejudice soever, 
to give beauty to any opinions. I have met men holding 
beliefs so tenaciously who, on finding they could not main¬ 
tain their principles, so taken up and rested in, have cast 
away all belief (or pretended to do so) and called themselves 

Therefore let us search for truth reasonably, and never 
hold an opinion so blindly that we are not willing to hear 
any fresh ideas which may help us to throw away error and 
“ hold fast that which is good.” 

W. A. B. 

man’s place in the universe. 

i 88 


The Fortnightly Review of March 1 st, I9°3> contained an 
article, with the above heading, by Alfred R. Wallace, which 
we have been requested to examine in The Earth. I he 
article is rather long ; so if the reply to it be equally long, 
and the Ed. of The Earth cannot find room for it in one 
issue, I suppose it will have to appear in two. 

Mr. Wallace is a scientist of no mean repute, and his name 
is familiar to Zetetics in connection with an experiment tried 
on the Old Bedford Level. This experiment was fully de¬ 
scribed at the time by the referee for John Hampden, Esq., 
Mr. William Carpenter, especially in two pamphlets published 
by him, entitled respectively Wallace's Wonderful Water , 
and Water Not Convex; the Earth Not a Globe; demon¬ 
strated by Alfred R. Wallace, F.R.G.S. We need not now 
refer further to these pamphlets, except to say that they 
were well received, and reviewed at the time ; and that the 
writer of this article will be glad if any of our readers can 
spare a copy, especially of the latter, as they are both now 
out of print. It would be for the interest of the Plane Truth 
if these trenchant pamphlets were both reprinted. With 
these preliminary remarks we will now turn to the article 
under review. 

In his opening remarks Mr. Wallace says: 

“To the early astronomers the earth was the centre of the visible 
universe, sun, moon, planets, and stars all alike revolving around H in 
more or less eccentric and complex orbits ; and all were thought to exist 
as appendages to our globe, and for the sole use and enjoyment ot man 
—‘ the sun to rule by day, and the mi o 1 and stars to rule by night. 
But when it was found that our earth was not specially distinguished 
from other planets by any superiority of size or position, it was seen 
that our pride of place must he given up.” 

This opening paragraph seems to be the key to the wiiter s 
position; for, while it contains a .confession of the ancient 
belief and truth, it is mixed up with modern underlying as¬ 
sumptions which, until proved, vitiate not only the “ New 
Astronomy ” upon which the writer leans for support, but 
the whole of his carefully elaborated argument. It will be 
noted he (a) calls the “ earth” " our globe,” not to be dis¬ 
tinguished in this respect from the •' other planets ” ; (b) that 

MAN’S place in the universe. 


this was “ found ” by the establishment of the “ Copernican 
system”; and (c) that ancient writers only “thought,” al¬ 
though they “ naturally ” thought, that the sun and moon 
were intended “ for the sole use and enjoyment of man.” 
Thus there are three assumptions underlying his position at 
the very outset ; the first and most important, because it is 
the assumption which underlies all astronomical theories and 
conclusions, namely, that the earth is a “ globe,” and a 
“ planet ” amongst “ other planets,’’ being “ our globe ” ; and 
second, that Bible and other ancient writers only “.thought,” 
though they very “ naturally ” thought, there was only one 
sun to rule the day, while modern scientists believe there 
are “ millions of suns and systems, many of which were 
(are ?) probably far grander and more important than ours’’; 
and, third, that all this was “ found ” out “ when the Coper¬ 
nican system became established.” , 

Now we should like to ask what was the year of our Lord 
when the Copernican system “ became established ” ; and 
who established it ? It was certainly not established by 
Copernicus, for he honestly confesses that the system was 
based on hypotheses, or suppositions. He admitted even 
more ; for he wrote . 

“ It is not necessary that the hypotheses should be true, or even pro¬ 
bable ; it is sufficient that they lead to results of calculation which agree 
with calculation.Neither let anyone, so far as hypotheses are con¬ 

cerned, expect anything certain from astronomy, since that science can 
afford nothing of the ki.,d.” 

Yet, knowing this, Mr. W. quietly assumes that the Co¬ 
pernican system was “ established ” ; and that it was “ found ” 
that our earth was a “ planet” ! Until we are informed by 
whom, how and when, this system was “ found ” to be true, 
and thus “ established,” we must beg leave to accept the 
Copernican Confession before the statements of the writer 
under consideration. 

As I have already shown in the pages of The Earth , 
“ Gravitation ” is another tremendous but unproven assump¬ 
tion underlying the “New Astronomy”; and it equally 
underlies M. W.’s belief and article. But I mention this 
not merely to show what hypotheses underlie this question, 
but for the sake of a short quotation from Sir Isaac Newton 




respecting these suppositions. He says : 

“ But the reason of these properties of gravity I could never hitherto 
deduce from phenomena, and I am unwilling to frame hypotheses about 
them ; for whatever is not deduced from phenomena ought to be called 
hypothesis, and no sort of hypotheses are allowable in experimental 
philosophy. ” 

Yet writers on astronomy pile on supposition after sup¬ 
position as though they would, by the number and subtlety 
of their guesses, make up for their lack of foundation facts, 
and certainties. But in the interests alike of religion and 
of logic we cannot allow these unfounded speculations to 
pass unchallenged. And that they have a direct bearing 
upon important religious questions and doctrines the writer 
of the article in the F. R. himself ably shows. He says : 

“ The tendency of all recent astronomical research has been to give us 
wider views of the vastness, the variety, and the marvellous complexity 
of the stellar universe, and proportionally to reduce the importance of 
our little speck of earth almost to the vanishing point; and this has been 
made use ot by the more aggressive among modern sceptics to hold up 
religious creeds and dogmas to scorn and contempt. They point out 
the irrationality and absurdity of supposing that the Creator of all this 
unimaginable vastness of suns and systems, filling, for all we know, 
endless space, should have any special interest in so pitiful a creature as 
man, the degraded or imperfectly developed inhabitant of one of the 
smaller planets attached to a second or third rate sun ; while that He 
should have selected this little world for the scene of the tremendous and 
unique sacrifice of His Son, in order to save a portion of these ‘ miserable 
sinners ’ from the natural consequences of their sins was, in their view, 
a crowning absurdity too incredible to be believed by any rational being. 
And it must be confessed that the theologians had no adequate reply 
to this rude attack ; while many of them have felt their position to be 
untenable, and have renounced the idea of a special revelation and a 
supreme Saviour for the exclusive benefit of so minute and insignificant 
a speck in the universe.” 

This paragraph shows the importance of the Zetetic con¬ 
tention from a religious standpoint, for we readily admit 
that if the astronomical guesses be true relative to “ all this 
unimaginable vastness of suns and systems,” then the above 
infidel objections are founded upon good reasons ; but if 
these suppositions are not true, according to the Zetetic 
contention, then the sceptic is unreasonable in taking for 
granted the truth of acknowledged hypotheses, and the 
theologian highly culpable in giving up historical and re¬ 
vealed truth for mere speculative and unproved assumptions. 
(to be continued D. I'.) 






I had a copy of the Christmas Number of Present Truth 
lent me, and in an article for little children, called Christmas 
Candles , it says : “ The moon and the planets have no light 
of their own any more than our earth has—it is the reflection 
of the rays of the sun, which, though it has passed for a 
time out of our sight, is still shining in the heavens, and 

giving us light by night as well as by day.The moon is 

but a bearer of the sun’s light.” 

Now when people are trying to teach children Scripture 
truths, why do they turn aside to the theories of heathen 
philosophers, and the teachings of men whose one aim is to 
deny the Bible and the need of a Creator or Saviour ? 
Genesis i. plainly teaches that the Lord made two great lights, 
and innumerable smaller ones ; the greater—the sun—to rule 
the day, and the lesser—the moon, and. stars—to rule the 

I he revelation of God is plain ; not delivered in mysterious 
language, and, when understood, corresponds with right 
reason. So why try to muddle our children’s heads with a 
lot of trash, that the very propounders do not rightly under¬ 
stand, and cannot substantiate ? No scientist has ever given 
proof that the moon receives its light from the sun, but 
true science teaches that they are independent lights, be¬ 
cause being lights of such different, character one could not 
be a reflector of the other, as a reflector must necessarily 
reflect what it receives ; so instead of our earth having no 
light of its own, Scripture teaches we have two lights all our 
own, for they were set to minister to our earth, to divide 
day from night ; to be for signs and seasons ; and for days 
and years. 

And further, the writer tries to teach that Christian religion 
is moonshine, by saying, “Just as the moon reflects the 
sun's rays, so the Christian should catch the rays of the Sun 
of Righteousness and shed them over the world.” With 
all due reverence to the writer’s object, I trust that Christians 
will do their utmost to shed abroad the rays of the Sun of 
Righteousness exactly as they receive them, unmixed with 
the traditions and fables of men, .which, like the moon is 
supposed to do, would turn all the warmth of Love into 



coldness of heart, and make God a God to be feared instead 
of a God to be loved and trusted, and a God to whom we 
can unburden our inmost soul and ask for guidance in times 
of need ; and to whom we can take our highest hopes and 
greatest triumphs and know that he feels alike our joys and 

If Christians were to study their Bibles more, and act 
according to the Divine teachings, they would soon take 
away the taunt of Christianity being moonshine. 

I will here take the opportunity to reply to your corres¬ 
pondent, Mr. H. J. Young, on 

Levelling and Theodolite Work. 

I have been engaged in building operations, large and 
small, for the past nineteen years, and have always levelled 
work in the manner described by him, but I contend they 
are points in a true level , not points of a great circle ; and 
I should very much like to know by what method a spirit 
level describes a circle. He says that the lengths of level 
line used in building operations are not long enough to dis¬ 
tinguish between level and horizontal lines. I should like 
to know the difference, as I have always found the horizon 
line at sea perfectly level; so I fear he will be unable to give 
us a practical proof of the difference. 

If the lengths of building lines do not satisfy him, perhaps 
the evidence of a practical engineer may interest him. Mr. 
W. Winckler, M.I.C.E., says: “As an engineer of many 
years standing, I say that this absurd allowance is only per¬ 
mitted in school books.I have projected many miles of 

railway, and many more of canals, and the allowance has not 
even been thought of, much less allowed for.” 

This allowance for curvature means this : that it is 8-ins. 
for the first mile of a canal, and increasing at the ratio by 
the square of the distance in miles, and thus a small navi¬ 
gable canal for boats, say 30 miles long, will have by the 
above rule an allowance for curvature of 600 feet. Think of 
that and then please credit engineers as not being quite such 
fools. Nothing of the sort is allowed. 




He asks how do I know two plummets would hang par¬ 
allel ? Practical proof—why do we plumb the walls of a 
building ? His reference to the pendulum has already been 

Crockham Hill. C. RHYS EVANS. 


“ Lady E. A. M. Blount, editor of The Earth , held a 
drawing room meeting at 1, Queen’s Gardens, Richmond, 
on Thursday, March 12th, which was well attended. Amongst 
those present were the Mayor (Mr. A. Chancellor), the 
Misses Davies, Miss Wilkinson, Mrs. Ferguson, Miss Behren, 
Mrs. and Miss Howey, Mrs. Priestman, Mrs. Barnett, the 
Misses Dixon, Mrs. Claridge, and others. The Chair was 
taken by Lieutenant-Colonel Wintle. Her ladyship gave an 
interesting and instructive address, in which she promulgated 
the theory that the earth was flat and motionless. Amongst 
those who took part in the discussion that followed were the 
chairman and Dr. Berks Hutchinson, of Capetown. 

We have received a letter from Mr. Sydney Holland, 
Chairman of the London Hospital, asking us to insert in 
The Earth an appeal for funds for that institution. We are 
very much pressed for space just now, and so we are sorry 
we cannot at present insert the whole of his earnest appeal. 
We believe the hospital is doing good work as far as we have 
been able to enquire, and that it is worthy of the support of 
Zetetics who have any to spare in that direction. Speaking 
for myself, personally, my whole time, means, and energy 
are taken up with the work in which we are engaged.—Ed. 



All communications and enquiries respecting this Magazine and the teaching it 
upholds, and all questions and matter for insertion , should he addressed to 
E.A.M.B., ii, Gloucester Road, Kingston Hill. 


The Ed. does not necessarily endorse statements made under the headings of 7he 
Earth's Observatory ,” Letters, etc., unless signed Ed. The Earth. 

“Lady Blount will chiefly devote herself, I understand, to the question, 

< Are we living on a level and immovable earth, or on a globe revolving at the 
rate of about 1,000 miles an hour, and travelling through space about 1,500,000 
a day?’ The greatest scientists, and the oldest and newest geographies, tell 
us that we are on a globe, but Lady Blount will seek to show that that is im¬ 
possible, and to hear her lecture ‘ all thinking people ’ are cordially invited, the 
admission being free. The first thought that will arise in the minds of most 
people on this subject as a proof of the globular theory is the teaching about 
the ship at sea, whose masts are seen before the hull as it approaches the shore. 

1 mentioned this matter to a surveyor who apparently believes that the earth 
and sea are a plane, and he replied that it was no proof that the earth is a 
globe, but that it was explainable by the laws of perspective, and that after a 
ship has entirely disappeared from the vision of the naked eye it can often be 
restored by a telescope. He himself had seen the whole of the Gunfleet light¬ 
ship off Walton-on-the-Naze by the aid of a glass, whereas, according to the 
supposed curvature of the earth, it would be 43 feet below the level of the line. 
The same gentleman also told me that the datum line from which surveys are 
made is always a horizontal line, and that no allowance for curvature is made 
in cutting canals. It will doubtless be highly interesting to hear Lady Blount’s 
description of how. as the Psalmist said, ‘ The world also is established that it 
cannot be moved.’ ”— Essex County Chronicle. . 


“ By education all have been misled 
They so believe because they so were bred. 
The priest continues where the nurse began, 
And thus the child imposes on the man.” 

St. MICHAEL’S LITERARY SOCIETY.—The meeting was held on the 
!)ihinst.,in the Men’s Institute. Rev. T. W. Henry, B. A., occupied the chair. 
A lecture on “ The Flat Earth,” was delivered by Mr. Atkinson, and proved 
both interesting and instructive. Several questions were asked by different 
members, and Mr. Atkinson having replied, a vote of thanks was passed to the 
essayist, and the meeting was brought to a close by pronouncing the bene¬ 
diction.- Belfast Evening Telegraph, 10/2/03. 



WHY MEN DO NOT GO TO CHURCH.-“ My opinion is that most 
men want a religion and a public worship, but the religion they seek must 
follow the lines of scientific enquiry, abandoning error when discovered, and 
retaining only what is rationally true.” 

“ The reason why men have ceased to go to church is because they have 
ceased to believe in the myths of the Bible—the creation of the world, the fall 
of man, original sin, and the atonement.” 

“ The cause is simply the progress of science.” 

From The Morning Leader. 

Caution.—Mr. Marconi was the guest at the house dinner of the Savage Club 
in London on Saturday, and made a speech upon wireless telegraphy, The 
results attained, he said, had greatly increased all over the world the great in¬ 
terest taken in so fascinating a subject. His system of wireless telegraphy was 
now used on twenty-five transatlantic liners ; it had established communication 
with stations on both sides of the Atlantic, which communication was valuable 
*° P assen S ers > but in some instances had been serviceable to the safety 
of ships. (Cheers). These land stations on both sides of the Atlantic could 
be spoken for a distance of 200 miles, but he confidently hoped to increase that 
distance very considerably shortly. He felt bound to acknowledge the great 
encouragement King Edward had already given him. As early as 1898 His 
Majesty, as Prince of Wales, had lent him the Royal yacht Osborne for three 
weeks at a time for bis experiments. The British Government had to be very 
cai.tious what steps they took, as this subject was one afiecting the whole 
empire. He sympathised with that caution, but as half a Britisher himself— 
(cheeis)— he should be sorry if the result of that policy was that every contin¬ 
ental nation should reap the advantages of this system of wireless communication 
be ore England, (Cheers).— Northern Daily Telegraph , 23/2/03. 


ROTATING. To the Editor.—In an astronomical work I have been 
studying there is the figure of a circle representing the orbit of the Earth in 
which two horizontal lines are drawn, the lower line dividing the circle into 
two equal portions, the upper line representing the Ecliptic, on which a figure 
of the sun is placed—said to be 2 000,000 miles above the line which divides 
the Earths orbit into two equal portions. The Earth is represented as starting 
on its annual rotation from the centre of the orbit on September 20th, and on 
September 23rd reaches the plane of the Ecliptic. That is very rapid travelling 
—two million miles in three days. It is very well that we do not go at that 
speed all through the year, as another figure shows the months when "the earth 
moves slower; the globist whistles “ Brakes down,” and when it gets to 20th 
September they open wide the “ throttle valve.” 

We had better be on the look out when September comes and give a wide 
berth to the tall chimneys, and it will be as well to do as they do out West, 
that is dig a hole near our dwelling to flee into when it becomes unsafe on the 



surface of the earth. This kind of philosophy reminds me of a practice I, with 
other boys, had of frequenting the barracks to hear the old soldiers tell of foreign 
countries ; an.d though they usually told us facts, they sometimes tried to see 
how much they could get us to take down. I compare this 2,000,000 miles in three 
days to the old soldiers’ stories, and decline to - all o-^ LOMyVT(TESEAN . 

[We do not wonder you cannot swallow such stories. The great mistake in such 
writings is in attributing the motion of the sun to the earth. The earth has 
no such motion, and yet in works which professedly uphold Bible teaching 
we are again and again treated to these fabujous stories of the earth s career 
through space on an everlasting tour round the sun, and moving so many 
thousands, and in this case so many millions, of miles, as described above. 
Mr. Dimbleby’s works are of this class. His books contain many good 
things on time and Bible chronology, though all that he says he cannot 
verify ; but his greatest mistake, as we have said, is in contradicting the Bible 
and Reason by insisting the earth is rushing through spice at an awful rate, 
while the Creator and our own senses tell us “ that it is fixed ” so firmly on 
* foundations ’ that it cannot be moved at any time.”—Ed.] 

Tam interested in the article appearing in the current number of The Earth , 
and which deals with the subject of the tides. I am pleased to see an attempt 
to account for the opposing influences of moon and earth, but 1 think the theory 
advanced is fantastic and wrong in that it overlooks the fact that the elevated 
portion of water, though in a state of expansion, as per theory, would still 
have weight, and water finds its own level. 

My own belief is that a wave of intensified gravitation continually traversing 
the interior of the earth, and that the waters of the sea are attracted to that 
portion of the earth’s surface immediately under the influence of this wave, but 
of course I do not dogmatize on this.—J. H. 

[As gravitation is only a theory which has never been proved, Zetetics cannot 
admit the assumption of any hjpothelical power to explain the cause oi the 

2. King Edward Terrace, Beehive Road, Baddow Road, 


Dear Madam, Feb. 24th, 1903. 

I thank you for the package of literature, which I have read and return 
as requested. I noted the articles on Sunset and Sunrise , and ot course agree 
with you as to the effects of Perspective. As to Refraction—I think that the 
so-called “Ether” must be less dense than the atmosphere, or it would not 
remain above it. This reasoning from everyday observations—(Is reason from 
analogy, not Irom observation.—Ed.)—:and, as in the majority of cases, light 
passing from a rarer to a denser medium is refracted toward the normal, it is 
only reasonable to suppose (!) that this is the case with the rays of sunlight. 
Of course I do not see how we can actually prove this to be the case; mirages 
seem —(“seem;” saying they seem to do is not proving they do. Ed.) to 
confirm our conclusion in regard to the behaviour of light in an atmosphere of 
varying density ; neither do I see how it can be disproved, nor the reverse proved 
—(by first learning that the earth is a plane from the fact that water is level Ed.) 

If light does not travel in straight lines, the matter is worthy of thorough in¬ 



vestigation ; but I think it has been proved conclusively that the direction of a 
ray of light travelling through a homogeneous medium will, until reflected, be 
in a straight line—(this is not the question, as you show in the next line.—Ed.) 

Of course the atmosphere is not homogeneous, but the density varies with 
the height, so that the direction of light rays would not be affected laterally. 

All experiments prove that light is radiated equally in all directions ; and the 
Creator being so strong on the point of uniformity and order, is it reasonable 
to suppose that the sun which is a source of light, should act so contrary to all 
other lights ? (Do you know any experiments that have been tried with this 
o >ject in view, and, if so, under what conditions were they made ?—Ed.) 

Do not think that I am a believer in extreme “scientific” statements, for I 
maintain that the authors of such have stepped out of the depth of legitimate 
reasoning, and are floundering in the ocean of baseless conclusions. (You are 
doubtless right. — Ed.) Believe me, yours very sincerely, 


Shorncliffe. 26/2/03. 

Dear Iyidy Blount,—I write to thank you for your kind letter of the 14th 
inst., and now lorward some of the results of my observations, which have been 
as exhaustive as time would permit. We have recently been very fortunate in 
having several days on which the atmosphere was perfectly clear, and, as I think 
I have previously told you, the spur of the hill on which we live is, perhaps, one 
ol ihe best places on the earth for making such observations, remembering that 
there are objects in vight, and at such convenient and approximate known dis¬ 
tances ; arid also that the great commercial route below us comprises a greater 
part of the London, North Sea, Baltic, and North European traffic which pro- 
ceedi west, large numbers of ships are always in sight. 

1 intended sending you a list of questions of a general character, and which 
do not appear to square with your views ; but seeing several statements, by 
“ Zetetes,” reprinted in the current Earth , on what he terms the “hull-down 
proof,” I venture to forward my contribution on the same subject, (as the prop¬ 
osition that water is flit seems to be the one on which “Zetetes” stakes every¬ 
thing), and will merely ask you one astronomical question : “ Why, instead of 
travelling along the horizon, do the most southern constellations appear to revolve 
in one sideral day round Ocians. 

It will, perhaps, be well, before I proceed with my observations, to say that 
my position here is similar to that of a superintending accountant and confidential 
clerk of a large office. The staff is composed of men of broad experience and 
who have travelled over most of the known world. One has resided some years 
in Central America, and tells me that among his acquaintances there was a sea 
captain who was a strong pianist, and of whose ideas he has imbibed. Two 
others in the office declared that water was fiat; several are globists, 
and o'.hers had open minds. It seemed necessary to tell you this to enable 
you to see that our investigation was not a one-sided affair. Should any of your 
friends doubt my statements, or wish for further information, I shall have no 
difficulty in obtaining and forwarding the statements of others, or if preferable 
the addresses of my co investigators. 

I will, as briefly as possible, relate a few of the chief tests which may 
for convenience be described under four heads. Observations were made 
from an elevation of 250 feet, o.ur strongest telescope having a power of 160 
diameters, and several observers compared notes at each position. Humanly 
speaking, the conditions were perfect. Vessels were seen to rise into clear view 
as if they were coming up over a bend ; although the distance was considerable 
there was no mistaking the manner of these appearances and disappearances, 
which agreed with the descriptions given in the ordinary text books. The 
vessels went out of sight at precisely the same time to all the observers, whether 

19 & 


they had glasses of high or low power. The slightest haze would, of course 
have altered these conditions, but we were fortunate in having it clear. 

(2) Two points were selected—Cape Grez Nez on the French coast, and 
Dungeness on our own coast. All the vessels and portions of vessels seen above 
the horizon within these points were counted from our elevation, and also, a 
minute or two after, from an elevation of 10 feet. From the former position 
32 were seen, from the latter only 10 were seen. On another occasion 40 were 
seen from the higher and 12 from the lower position. The same persons, with 
their own glasses, observed in each position, and the horizon was so closely 
searched and notes compared that I am satisfied nothing escaped. 

(3) At 10 feet, processions of masts and rigging were watched going up and 
down the channel (straight across the front of our position) ; now and then a 
vessel would come nearer in to the shore than the majority, when more of its 
masts and perhaps its hull could be seen. Quite a number passed with only 
their pennants and two or three feet of their topmasts in sight, the cordage and 
other details being plainly seen through strong glasses. Some steamed at such 
a distance that only portions of the funnels showed above the water, others were 
passing but their smoke only could be seen above the horizon, and, whether it 
rose in thick volumes or in lesser quantities, it was as plainly seen that the speed 
and direction of the vessel was clearly indicated, and it could at times be followed 
with the naked eye. Such eights can be seen here every day. 

(4) This test is a modification of number two, and carried out more leisurely. 
At a good elevation a group of vessels at a convenient distance would be selected, 
and as we descended the disappearance would be closelv watched; on retracing 
our steps the vessels would be seen to gradually re-apperr. 

This test showed that a vessel which was distinctly visible to the naked eye 
disappeared in proportion to the speed that the hill was descended, and vice, 
versa, clearly demonstrating that it was not the distance (according to the law 
of perspective) which prevented it from being seen, and that “a telescope can¬ 
not pierce a segment of water,” to quote a most caustic Zetetic. 

(5) This test was made on a dark night when the atmosphere was quite free 
from fog. Various lights along the French coast could be seen quite distinctly, 
but one in particular gives a sweeping flash of snch remarkable brilliance that 
it attracts everybody’s notice for miles along our coast. This was selected as 
our point of observation. The distance from the edge of the Sandgate promen¬ 
ade to the water’s edge was just 50 yards, and the beach descends fairly rapidly. 
For the first 20 yards the light was distinctly seen, each flash ; but as one ad¬ 
vanced another pace it entirely disappeared, and for the 30 yards to the water’s 
edge no light of any sort could be seen on the French coast. 

If any of your contributors are able to explain away these facts or show that 
something or other has not been taken into account in these experiments I shall 
be pleased to hear them; but at present I must go a little further than one 
Zetetic writer, who says that water is flat or thereabouts , and confess that to me 
the surface of the sea appears to be convex. The law of perspective, used in 
the most liberal manner possible, utterly fails to account for the phenomena 
which I have witnessed and described. 

My earnest and prayerful desire has been to obtain the truth, and I hope you 
will see that the retention of my opinions is not due to senseless perverseness. 
I assure you that these opinions would at once have been given up if the evidence 
of my senses had been against them. It will be seen by the two enclosed copies 
of lectures, given by me recently, lhat the accepted view of the earth’s shape 
does not in way lead one to disbelieve in the revelation of God to mar, or that 
one word of the Mosaic Cosmogony is incorrect. 

Allow me to thank you very heartily for your kindness, and the very consid¬ 
erate way in which you have treated one who, in a sense, belongs to the opposing 
camp. With very best wishes, believe me, yours sincerely, 

J. MARRIOTT, Sergt.-Major. 


' 9/9 

[Perhaps some of our readers who have made similar investigations will be able 
to reply to this letter. We should have liked it better had it been more 
definite as to the distances of the vessels, etc., but we print it as it is, believing 
the writer to be honest. He should, however, examine the proofs we have 
often given in The Earth that water is absolutely level. We note that our 
correspondent believes the Bible to be scientifically correct in its Chronology ; 
to be consistent he should also believe the Bible to be correct in its statements 
on Cosmogony, or the shape and form of the earth.—Ed.] 

We take this opportunity of informing our readers that “ Zetetes ” is writing a 
series of articles on Chronology in The Sabbath of Creation. 


A correspondent has sent us a lengthy letter from Northam, West Australia, 
dated January 25th, 1903. His letter is an arrogant attack on Pianists, and 
drags us back to the ABC of the question, whilst most of his assumed corrections 
are really nothing hut assertions of his own imagining. 

He commences his onslaught by saying that he “ really cannot understand." 
So far so good ; this is really his state of mind— he really cannot understand — 
and this keynote explains not only his frame of mind, but also that of his class 
of partly fledged astronomers. 

Our correspondent continues,after the word understand, and adds “how intelli¬ 
gent men can go the lengths they do on the Plane Earth Theory.” In these 
words it is difficult to be quite sure whether Mr. F. attempts to compli¬ 
ment corr -spondents to The Earth as persons who may be intelligent, or whether, 
on the other hand, he means to imply deficiency of intellect as the mainspring 
of the Flat Earth School. 

The religious element is of course not even hinted at, as religion is by no 
means a leading mark with the astronomer whose aim is, and always was, 
atheism pure and simple, or, to put it kindly, an attempt to deliver the world 
Irom the ridiculous and, to them, insane fad of believing in a future existence 
and a Divine Creator, together with a Divine origin in all things. 

This inherent propensity in the astronomer accounts for his monstrous per¬ 
versions, and his denial of Biblical evidence. 

He objects also on the grounds that the Flat Earth Theory is ancient. 
He cannot bear this, and likes everything modern and in its place. He likes 
the modern Globe Theory and wireless telegraphy to Mars. Nevertheless, 
the modern application of wireless telegraphy on this earth itself he never will 
relish, as that clearly proves that the earth is not a globe ; and the general 
tendency of it is certainly to prove that it is flat. 

lo continue : this Australian writer ventures on two questions in perspective. 
He makes two statements, one of which is clearly absurd, whilst the second 
proves that he is acquainted with the more correct explanation of the Educative 
action of perspective. Why then his questions ? Why does he propound two 
totally difterent views of perspective, end ask the editor of an advanced maga¬ 
zine to state which is coirectf 

This is the singular feature of his enquiry. We are aclually called upon to 
say of two simple matters which one is right, as if, indeed, he was setting a 
trap for our editorial judgment, and was hoping that we would fall into it, and 
of course uphold the impossible and ridiculous teaching that perspective enlarges 
objects. Really it is too much to expect that the editor of a high-class magazine 
should stoop to decide between a black ball and a white one—as to which is 
black ! Of a line of lamp posts, each 100 feet high, he really wishes us to explain 
whether they disappear by the bottoms being summaiily exit off, or by the tops 
collapsing, or, lastly, by the gradual process of being lost to sight. 

200 THE earth’s observatory. 

And now to return to this awful letter, which I have not got far into-as yet, V 
having only just reached the eleventh line of this amazing document. 9 

The next query is “do we not see the sun rise bit by bit?” Well, yes, I I 
conclude that I may say we do, but it does not require a scientific magazine to | 
tell the world this. However, more follows. Having got the sun up, he says: 

“is it not bigger than when at 12 mid-day ? ” This staggering question shews 
the mental status of the average astronomical pretender. Clearly he is quite 
oblivious to atmospheric efleet. And here I may add that he has a companion 
in a recent writer who set to work to measure the diameter of the sun by the 
time it took to rise or set. 

The result in this case was very disastrous, as the experimenter made the dia¬ 
meter of the sun some 240 miles by timing its rising or setting when refracted 
by the atmosphere, instead of the correct measurement of 32 miles which latter 
distance is found from the sun’s movement at 12 o’clock mid-day, at which hour 
no refra :tion is caused by the atmosphere. 

Mr. F.’s next query has to do with distances found in given latitudes, and his ; 
measurements are all behind the times as regards maps of^the latest 
(1902-3) patterns. He has evidently seen some abandoned publications of many 
years standing, and knows little or nothing of the modern distances found by 
steam-boats, and on which later plans have been framed. His letter, however, 
gives us one distance which may be of value—and is of considerable value if 
correct—namely, 2,118 miles between Bunbury and Brisbane, Australia. 

From this more or less valuable distance he passes on to conjectures about 
the rising of the sun, and which might be worth examination only that further 
on in his letter it is found that these conjectures are really based on paltry dia¬ 
grams of his own construction. 

This is the crying sin of all astronomers. They construct small figures, often 
about the size of half-a-crown, and from these small figures they construct their 
whole theory of the earth and the stars. Anyone who examines one of these 
diagrams cannot fail to perceive, when his attention is drawn to this marvellous 
fact, that the astronomers use one and ike same horizon for every place or position, 
and this horizon is in reality the central inside plane of a sphere, and is actually 
the very plane which we Pianists contend for as the earth itself. 

They take our earth for their horizon , whereas vie, on the other hand, teach 
that each locality has its own horizon ; and it has long been pointed out that 
this would be the case even on a globe. Even on a globe the horizon must be 
local to the individual. This one crucial fact disposes of the whole science of 
astronomy, and brings it down like a house of cards. 

Speaking of his sunrises, this writer’s words are, “ This being calculated on a 
planisphere which is very small. Here then are the two crying sms of astrono¬ 
mers in the words of one of them. They calculate on a planisphere (instead 
of a globe) and it—the planisphere—is very small. Half-a-Crown size is the " 

usual thing. J 

Finally, this penman, is for a midnight sun down South, and the late Ant- ft 
arctic Expedition should be able to de icle this point, which practical navigators J 
are opposed to, in that when running between Cape Good Hope and Melbourne, j 
in latitude 00 S, they carry the midday sun on the port hand , but wl ei in lat- J 
itucle 43 S the sun is carried to starboard, and is never seen at night , so they sav. J 

Let the Antarclics s eak out as the matter is important ; but in no case can it j 
make the earth a globe. It will simply alter late 1903 plans of the eailh. The * 
main objection to the land outside is that the countries are out of all proportion i 
to each other, both Russia and China being very vast. [ 

Speaking of his sunrises, this correspondent uses the language of conjecture \ 
and says “ if the sun rises 30 deg. South of East it sets 30 deg. South of West I 
and the latitude would be 40 deg.” But why has this conjecture been hazarded . V 
He resides at Perth , in latitude 31 deg., wbv then has he set to work to con- /j 
jecture for latitude 40 deg., instead of stating what actually occurs at Perth itself? jj 
This of course throws discredit on all his statements. From latitude 40 deg. 11 


he ventures to latitude 51 deg., and, among other statements, he happily says 
that the sun is due south. 

In this latter conjecture he- is contradicted by practical Navigation, which 
proves beyond question that the sun often bears Norths even in Southern latitudes. 
In support of this most valuable fact I am able to quote Nories' Epitome of 
Navigation , p. 188, example No. 2 : “On September 21, 1874, Longitude 90 
deg. E, the meridian altitude of the sun’s lower limb was 58 deg. 12 min. 10 secs. 
bearing North : Index error, 2-10, height of the eye 14 feet : required the lati¬ 
tude.” m. s. 

Sun’s declination (Table x) .■. 0 40 North 

Correction for Longitude 90 East (Table 12) 6 

Correct declination 

Observed Sun’s lower limb 
Index error 

Correct observed altitude lower limb 
Correction table I x plus 11 m. 7 s. 

0 46 North 
58 12 North 


Meridian Zenith distance 
Correct declination 

38 South 
46 North 

" latitude .. ... 30 52 South ; that of 

Perth, West Australia, almost to a minute. Here then, in the very latitude of 
Perth itself, from whence this person dates his letter, we have the clearest refu¬ 
tation of his nonsensical conjectures—which, of course, have no application at 
Perth, nor anywhere else in the various latitudes he has thought proper to select, 
instead of confining himself to actual observations at Perth. I need say no more. 

March, 1903. E. E. MIDDI.ETON. 

A SPECIAL LECTURE was given at the New Assembly Hall, Union St., 
Coventry, on Monday, March 23rd, 1903, by Lady Blount, entitled “ Is the 
Earth a Globe?” The Band of tne 2nd V. B. Roy. 'War. Regt., conducted by 
Mr. T. J. Marshall, (by kind permission of Col. H. Nutt and the Officers o r the 
Regiment, played Selections, and Songs were sung by Messrs. A. II. U .iiLiSVi*,.., 
and A. Longbottom (accompanied by Mr. A. Mealand). The whole of the 
music and songs given during the evening were composed by the lecturer. 
Reserved Seats were charged for. 

Regarding the above lecture, Mrs. Longbottom writes, March ?7th:j‘We 
are seeing the results of the Lecture already, as two or three were fully convinced 
that the Plane Earth Theory is true, and a few more are wavering. It has also 
given Archie the opportunity of speaking to several who would not hear a word 
about it before.” 

The Ed. also held a meeting at Lewes Mansions, on March 21th ; and at the 
Clifton Hall, Selhurst, on the 26th. Dr. E. Haughton took the chair on the 
latter occasion. A collectiou was made after this meeting, when the friends 
present gave liberally ; and our highly esteemed, Mr. Arthur West, who arranged 
the meeting, handed the proceeds to a poor Christian friend. Fuller accounts 
and newspaper reports of these meetings will be printed in our next issue, if 
space allows; but in any case Dr. E. Haughton’s able opening address will 
appear (n.v.) 




IVe have much pleaswe in recommending the above work. 

The booklet contains the three thousand words, and idioms, 
which are most used in ordinary conversation ; sufficient to 
enable you to talk French all your life ; no fossil philological 
peculiarities, but French as it is actually spoken in France. . 
Grammar underlies each group of examples, and we * think- 
this a cleverly condensed method of teaching the French 


The Author of French in Three Months also gives Lessons 
in Conversational French to adults, at j 




Friends of the Ed. of this Magazine can testify to his ability ■ 
and agreeable way of teaching. 

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co., 


22, Budge Row, Cannon Street, 


Price of Appliances £1 Is,, £2 2s., & £3 3s. 1 

Instalments may be arranged. 


Vol. III. Nos. 35 & 36. 




Extracts from an Address given by Lady BLOUNT, at 
Hampton Place , Brighton , on April 19th, 1903, 

An article with a similar heading to the above appears in 
the March number of Past and Future. This journal is 
described, on its title page, as “ a monthly journal of the 
Second Advent, and investigations concerning Biblical 
Chronological, Astronomical, and Historical subjects.” 

With the hope of the Second Advent we entirely agree, 
and with the investigation of the other subjects mentioned 
we are also in harmony. But we want these subjects in¬ 
vestigated in a reasonable and Scriptural manner. The 
editor of the paper professes to uphold Bible teaching, and 
for the greater part he does so on Chronology and historical 
subjects. But on astronomical subjects and Bible Cosmogony 
we believe he is entirely astray, and leading others astray 
in helping to support the infidel science of the day. He 
upholds the doctrine of a whirling globe, flying through 
so-called “ space ” faster than a flash of lightning. 

How the Lord will return to such a flying ball the editor 
does not trouble to explain, much less how the holy city— 
the New Jerusalem—will “ come down from heaven ” to rest 
upon any particular locality of such a madly whirling sphere ! 
But these things he perhaps regards as trifles compared with 
the question of the time it takes this cannon-like ball to go 
through its various evolutions, flying now east and then, 
without any adequate cause, turning back in its so-called 
orbit, and shooting west. 

It is not often that first-rate astronomers try to prove the 
earth’s motions ; but occasionally some of their disciples will 
try their hands at it. Mr. Dimbleby goes a point further 
and tells his readers “ how to observe the rotation of the 




Jl e have much pleasuie in recommending the above work . 

The booklet contains the three thousand words, and idioms, 
which are most used in ordinary conversation ; sufficient to 
enable you to talk French all your life ; no fossil philological 
peculiarities, but French as it is actually spoken in France. 
Grammar underlies each group of examples, and we' think 
this a cleverly condensed method of teaching the French 


The Author of French in Three Months also gives Lessons 
in Conversational French to adults, at 




Friends of the Ed. of this Magazine can testify to his ability 
and agreeable way of teaching. 

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co., 


22, Budge Row, Cannon Street, 


Price of Appliances £1 is,, £2 2s., k £3 3s. 

Instalments may be arranged. 



Vol. III. Nos. 35 & 36. 




Extracts from an Address given by Lady Blount, at 
Hampton Place , Brighton , on April igt.h, 1903. 

An article with a similar heading to the above appears in 
the March number of Past and Future. This journal is 
described, on its title page, as “a monthly journal of the 
Second Advent, and investigations concerning Biblical 
Chronological, Astronomical, and Historical subjects.” 

With the hope of the Second Advent we entirely agree, 
and with the investigation of the other subjects mentioned 
we are also in harmony. But we want these subjects in¬ 
vestigated in a reasonable and Scriptural manner. The 
editor of the paper professes to uphold Bible teaching, and 
for the greater part he does so on Chronology and historical 
subjects. But on astronomical subjects and Bible Cosmogony 
we believe he is entirely astray, and leading others astray 
in helping to support the infidel science of the day. He 
upholds the doctrine of a whirling globe, flying through 
so-called “ space ” faster than a flash of lightning. 

How the Lord will return to such a flying ball the editor 
does not trouble to explain, much less how the holy city— 
the New Jerusalem—will 11 come down from heaven ” to rest 
upon any particular locality of such a madly whirling sphere ! 
But these things he perhaps regards as trifles compared with 
the question of the time it takes this cannon-like ball to go 
through its various evolutions, flying now east and then, 
without any adequate cause, turning back in its so-called 
orbit, and shooting west. 

It is not often that first-rate astronomers try to prove the 
earth’s motions ; but occasionally some of their disciples will 
try their hands at it. Mr. Dimbleby goes a point further 
and tells his readers “ how to observe the rotation of the 



earth ! This is a very desirable exercise, and it will be 
interesting to the readers of The Earth , as well as the readers 
of Past and Future to watch such an interesting proceeding. 

He beg ins by saying :— 

“ Planetary motion has now become such an interesting part of astron¬ 
omy for the purpose of measurement, that there need he no stirprb-e that 
many persons study it diligently. One of these motions, and one by 
which Biblical history is so clearly proved, is the rotation of the earth in 
twenty-four hours. This may be witnessed by observing the following 
ext lanations.” 

from this paragraph it would appear that the readers of 
Past and Futtire are treated to a novel way of observing 
the earth s motions. They are invited to do so “ by obser¬ 
ving the following explanations ” ! Of course, Mr. D. should 
know the capacities of his readers better than we do ; for 
our part we should be inclined to give them credit for a clearer 
perception than is implied in the above paragraph. YVe 
think they will be able to see at least some slight difference 
between watching “the rotation of the earth,” and simply 
“ observing the following explanations ” ! At all events we 
know that Zetetics are gifted with sufficient perception to 
see through this evasion, as I shall now proceed to show. 
But before doing so I wish to state that I am fully persuaded 
that Mr. Dimbleby does not uphold error wilfully. 

The article begins by “explaining” that the “heavens 
around us are regarded as a circle, or meridian line of 360 
degrees or portions.” We are further informed that astron¬ 
omers draw this line “above and around the earth in the 
centre.” The heavens therefore are in a “line,” and there 
is an “ above ” as well as “ around ” to the earth ; but this 
“ above ” and this “ around ” which may be regarded as a 
“ circle,” is nevertheless “ in the centre ” of the earth. This 
is very deep science no doubt, as the centre of the earth is 
said to be 4,000 miles below the surface. But we must pass 
on to notice other equally scientific explanations. 

A diagram is given of the constellation of the Great Bear 
in relation to the North Polar Star; and we are informed : 

“ The Polar star never moves. It is like a nail driven in the sky ; 
hut all the other stars revolve round it in circles according to their dis¬ 
tance. The stars near it move round it in small circles, whilst those 
more distant travel in larger circles. Observing these facts, we notice 
that the Polar star is not in the Zenith overhead, but about 45 degrees 



or half way on the line between the horizon in the North and the Zenith* 
Here we have a proof that the axis of the earth upon which it turns is 
not perpendicular, but oblique, because the reason why the stars travel 
in circles round the Polar star is that the northern or upper axis of the 
earth points to the Polar star.” 

This paragraph is in the editor’s usual style. He is always 
giving “ reasons ” to his readers why certain appearances 
are seen in the heavens, and why they should not believe in 
the reality of these appearances. Perhaps his readers are 
docile enough to accept all these “ explanations ” in a be¬ 
coming spirit of humility, since they are propounded with 
such assurance and authority. But we are afraid that our 
Zetetic readers are not so docile, and they would ask us 
some troublesome questions if we were to “ reason ” in this 

For instance we are told that the “ Pole star never moves,” 
but “ all the other stars revolve round it in circles ” ; and 
that because the other stars revolve around the Polar star 
this is a “ proof” that the Earth revolves upon its “axis” ! 
So that the way to observe the “ rotation of the Earth ” 
according to Mr. D., is to watch the stars revolve about the 
pole star ! This is a very pretty proof indeed. 

It almost seems like an oversight on the part of the 
astronomers that they have not more vigorously taken up 
this simple proof; it would save them from going about 
with long pendulums, and watching them swing, and altering 
their planes of vibration. But the stars of the Great Bear 
have one advantage over the swinging of the pendulum, i.e., 
they always go round in the same direction, while the pen¬ 
dulum is not so amenable to the exigencies of astronomical 
theories, for it has been known on more than one occasion 
to alter the plane of its vibration in the wrong direction ! 
So that the editor of Past and Future scores one over 
orthodox astronomers in sticking to the tail of the Great Bear. 

Again, we are gravely informed that “ because the pole of 
the earth’s equator revolves round the pole of the ecliptic 
this is a proof that the stars do not revolve round 
the earth, but that the circles in which they (!) move round 
the northern pole are formed by the rotation of the Earth 
on its axis. This is the same as saying that because the 
stars revolve around the Earth therefore they do not revolve 
but the Earth rotates on its axis ! If such “ reasoning ” be 



acceptable to the readers of Past and Future it must be 
because their eyes have been blinded, like the editor’s, to 
its absurdity, to say nothing of the unscripturalness, of the 
globular theory. It is “reasoning” in a circle as it is 
called, and simply leaves you where you began. 

However good a chronologer the writer may be he is evi¬ 
dently deficient in the logical faculty, but though a man 
may be deficient in this, one would think that he might at 
least be guided by the Bible. But if a man start unknowingly 
from detective premises he may be led to draw false con¬ 
clusions, and it also appears that he may persist in advancing 
these false conclusions, as though they were the truth. VVe 
know no other way of accounting for the following assertions 
made by this writer; and we offer this as the most charita¬ 
ble “ explanation ” we can think of under the circumstances, 
believing that the writer means to be honest. 

It is therefore from no personal motive we thus speak, but 
the truth requires of us plain speaking when the veracity of 
the Word of God is the question at issue. We are informed 

“ It we fix a telescope fietween two stone pillars so that it cannot de¬ 
viate a hair’s breadth to the right or left of the meridian line, although 
it may be moved upwards or downwards upon it, we shall soon find that 
any star which crosses the centre of the object glass at the same instant 
as the sun will cross it on the following day 3 minutes and 56 seconds 
before the sun. This can only occur in consequence of the rotation of the 
earth being 23 hours, 56 minutes, and 4 seconds.” 

This looks like a deliberate statement, and any Zetetic 
knows it is not true. We can hardly believe that the editor 
is ignorant that there is another and more feasible explana¬ 
tion, namely, that it could occur by the stars moving round 
the earth in about four minutes less time than the sun goes 
liis daily round. We believe that the stars do so move, but 
the question here is not whether the stars do so move or 
not, but whether there is any other explanation possible of 
the phenomenon referred to ? We know there is another 
and a more plausible explanation, and we think Mr. D. ought 
to know ; yet he says : “ this can only occur in consequence 
of the rotation of the earth ” ! We leave it with our readers, 
and conclude with one more specimen of the unreliable 
nature of his repeated and dogmatic assertions. 

He says ; “VVe are assured that Scripture teaches us what 


20 $ 

the Works of God also prove, that the earth rotates on its 
axis, and also travels in an annual orbit round the sun.” In 
answer to this we need only quote one or two Scripture 
passages, such as the Creator’s question to Job: “Where 
wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth ? Where¬ 
upon were the foundations ( margin , sockets) thereof fastened? 
or who laid the corner stone thereof .”— ; Job xxxviii. 4-6. 

But Mr. D. denies that the Earth rests on foundations at 
all. Nevertheless, it has foundations, for “ He hath founded 
the earth upon her bases that it should not be moved for 
ever.”— Ps. civ. 5. 

No unimpeachable proof has ever been offered to the 
world of the earth’s supposed tertible motions. The astron¬ 
omers would almost give their ears for a good proof of such 
motions, but they cannot find one. They have the sense, 
however, to let the Bible alone on this point It is only, 
we think, the false friends of the Bible who attempt to make 
it harmonize with the doctrines of modern theoretical 

We know that practical investigation has proved the Earth 
to be as the Bible represents it, a vast plane, or series of 
planes. We can therefore quote with full approval Mr. D.’s 
closing paragraph, although of course we give it a different 
application : “ When the first chapter of Genesis is read in 
the light of scientific observation, readers are obliged to 
admire its accuracy, but they cannot avoid smiling at the 
ignorance of men who assume to contradict both Scripture 
and science.” We think that this is the only part of the 
article which is really true. 

If Mr. Dimbleby has no proof of the rotation of the Earth 
better than these “ explanations ” it should open his eyes to 
the truth. If he can find a proof not vitiated by the usual 
underlying globular assumptions, we shall be glad to find 
space for it in our journal, for as we have said before we have 
no personal feeling in the matter; our sole object being the 
truth, and the glory of God as set forth in the perfect re¬ 
liability of His Holy Word. 





(continued from p. 190). 

Prom various expressions in the article under examination 
t appears that the writer is an evolutionist as well as a 
spiritualist or spiritist. I mention this from no want of 

from C uh?L L u Ut that we ma >' see the standpoint 

liom which he views the universe. 

F01 the “ development ” of what he conceives to be the 
imperishable human soul, he assumes “infinite space and 

f R 1 r > - me •’ / et * n ar ^ c ^ e he has given us no reason 
for believing either in one or the other. We think that the 
idea of infinite space ” is a fiction of the astronomers ; and 
we know that infinite time is another. 

The date of Creation is clearly intimated to those who 
can rea t e great clock-work of the universe. In fact it 
has been calculated from the known rates of motion of the 
heav en bodies themselves. The eclipse cycles, the metonic 
c>cj e , the known periods ot the transits of Venus and Mer- 
cury, with the Sothic cycle, all point backwards to the prime 
date of Creation well within six thousand years. 

Men, ignorant of these facts, may scoff at the idea; but 
the)/ cannot dislodge the sun and the moon from the firma- 
mental heavens. Put until they are dislodged, or their 
various movements are arrested, it is really unscientific to 
talk of “ infinite time.” 

But Mr. Wallace thinks that our position in the universe 
ends support to the view “ that the supreme purpose of this 
\astuniverse was theproduction and development of thelivinrr 
soul in the perishable body of man.” It does not seem 
to trouble the writer that this “view” of development op¬ 
poses both the Bible doctrine of a special creation, and the 
teaching of our blessed Lord respecting the resurrection and 
immoitalization of the Christian’s material body. 

!( Hls ld f, as , in this respect seem to be the result of that 
scnence which, m the above paragraph, he appears to de- 
poie, 01 if his “views” of the physical universe be wrnnu 

th e ereof. n0t haver ‘ ght,y read the “ sa preme end and purpose” 
This, again, shows the great importance of correct cos¬ 



mological science, or knowledge. A true knowledge of the 
universe tends to give us a correct knowledge of the Creator ; 
but false views of the universe may not only give us a wrong 
estimate of man’s place in Nature, but may lead 11s to ignore 
or to deny the Creator, as such, altogether. 

This is evident from the article under review. For in¬ 
stance, the writer incongruously speaks of those sceptics 
who, supposing the universe to consist of vast systems of 
suns filing (?) “ endless space,” find a difficulty in believing 
that the Creator (if ever He made such a conglomeration !) 
should have “ any special interest in so degraded or imper¬ 
fectly developed (!) inhabitant of one of the smaller planets 
attached to a second or third rate sun,” such as ours is 
supposed to be ; while in giving his own opinion, he speaks 
of “the development of man as a spiritual being with ALL 
(Italics, &c., mine). 

The different descriptions given of man in two consecutive 
pages of the article is, to say the least, remarkable; and 
while we, as Zetetics, think neither description accurate, we 
believe the truth lies between them. Man by nature, as far 
as we have read the evidence both from the Bible and from 
Nature, is not “a spiritual being,” but he is a material being 
with the possibility of spiritual aspirations and attainments. 
But if he would, through the knowledge of God, “ attain to 
the divine nature,” he must give heed to the Word of the 
Creator, and to the message He has sent to the World 
through His crucified, risen, and glorified Son (2 Pet. i. 1-4.) 

But as Mr. Wallace has so ably shewn, in the lengthy 
paragraph I quoted above, the tendency of modern astron¬ 
omy, and especially of the “ New Astronomy,” leads not 
only sceptics to treat the doctrine of the Atonement with 
scorn, but even theologians to renounce their faith in a 
personal Creator, and in “the idea of a special revelation.” 
Either then the “ science ” which leads to these sad results 
is grievously at fault, or our faith needs a thorough revision ; 
but the pity is that so many professing Christians, as well 
as unreasoning sceptics, quietly assume that the so-called 
“ science” is infallible, while cravenly yielding up their faith 
in a glorious and divine revelation. 

Wherein, therefore, Mr. Wallace has dared to question 
the hypotheses of the “ New Astronomy,” we, as true Zetet- 


ics, must say all honour to him ; but as we believe he has 
not gone far enough nor questioned those hypotheses suffi¬ 
ciently, we must proceed to show wherein we think his 
reasoning and logic are defective. 

Star Distribution “in Space.” 

If we have erroneous ideas respecting the universe it 
follows that our ideas are also liable to be wrong about 
“ man s place ” in that universe. One error is naturally the 
result of the other. And our complaint against most, if not 
all, of the writers who treat on this subject is that they 
quietly assume a self-evolved universe, or even “universes,” 
which are not true to nature nor to fact, but based merely 
on astronomical speculations and hypotheses. These as¬ 
sumptions ought to be acknowledged as such ; if they are 
not so acknowledged it must either be because the writer is 
ignorant of the fact that they have been and can be called 
in question, or that he is not sufficiently candid to admit 
the hypothetical nature of the very foundation of his evolu¬ 
tionary system. 

Some astronomers, giving the reins to their imaginations, 
have speculated that there are an infinite number of stars 
(all “suns” of course) filling what they are pleased to call 
“ infinite space.” But infinite space never could be “ filled ” 
with any thing ! And however many “ universes ” of stars 
we might imagine in different parts of “ infinite space,” there 
would always be infinite blanks beyond, which would simply 
recede further off as more stars were added. But the writer 
under review gives us good reasons for believing in “ the 
limited extent of the universe of luminous stars.” He says: 

“ The total number of visible stars from the first to the ninth magnitude 
is about 200,000. Now if this rate of increase continued down to the 
seventeenth magnitude, the faintest visible in the best modern telescopes 
would be about 1,400 millions. But both telescopic observations and 
photographic charts show that there is nothing approaching this number. 5> 

This goes to prove that the number of stars is limited ; 
for as astronomical instruments grow more powerful there 
is a comparative diminution in the number of fresh stars 
revealed. This tact has only lately been discovered by the 
astronomers ; but the Psalmist knew it three thousand years 



ago, when he wrote : — “ He telleth the number of the stars ; 
he calleth them all by their names.”— Ps. cxlcii. 4. 

The fact that there are dark patches in the heavens where 
few, if any, stars can be seen, points to the same conclusion ; 
and these blanks of blackness are found both north and south 
of the equator. We are, therefore, pleased to agree with 
the writer that the “ stellar universe,” if we may use such a 
contradictory term, is strictly of “ limited extent.” As Ze¬ 
tetics we go further, we believe that heaven above, the earth 
beneath, and the waters under the earth, with all that is in 
them, form only ONE UNIVERSE, the limitations of which 
are much greater than Mr. W. would allow with his astron¬ 
omical ideas of immeasurable star distances. 

The measurement of star distances is amongst the most 
delicate and delusive, and the most difficult of astronomical 
observations. However, perfect astronomical instruments 
may be, and however accurate the readings taken, we know 
that there are assumptions underlying the calculations made 
which vitiate the whole of the conclusions drawn therefrom. 
For no matter how carefully a base line be measured, if that 
base line is supposed to extend to the opposite sides of the 
earth's orbit (and this “ orbit ” exist only in the astronomer’s 
imagination) how can reliance be placed upon the measure¬ 
ment of angles taken at the extremities of such a hypo¬ 
thetical base ? This again shows that before we can ap¬ 
proximately measure the distances of the stars we must first 
settle whether our base line is flat or spherical ; and whether 
that base is fixed and immovable, or for ever shifting its 
position in an “ orbit ” which would be impossible to describe 
if subject to all the fo’rces and all the various motions sup¬ 
posed to be connected therewith. Yet notwithstanding the 
importance of this fundamental question Mr. Wallace com¬ 
placently remarks :—• 

“ In die case of the stars the base line used is the diameter of the 
earth’s orbit, more than one hundred and eighty millions of miles. Every 
six months we are at opposite ends of this base.” 

I think it would require six months and take a longer 
article than Mr. Wallace has yet written to prove the truth 
of the above statement. Yet if this assumption be untrue, 
as we contend it is, then the vast and unimaginable star 





distances calculated on such assumptions fall to the ground 
like a house of cards ! No wonder, as the writer incidentally 
remarks, that astronomers “ for nearly two centuries ” have 
failed to settle the question of these vast distances. His 
own conclusion is that we, the inhabitants of the earth, are 
living somewhere near the middle of the “Milky Way”; 
and that “our sun” is one of the central orbs of a great 
globular star cluster, and therefore “very near to, if not 
actually at the centre of the whole visible universe” ! 

I his, certainly, is something better than the New Astron¬ 
omy, with all its “unimaginable vastness of suns and 
systems ” ; but if Mr. Wallace would only start de novo, and 
examine in a logical and candid spirit his own “ base line” 
we are persuaded that he would have still further to contract 
his ideas and bring them down to the universe of fact ; a 
universe, limited indeed, yet grand ; suitable for the abode 
of man whom God created in his own image, making all 
things m heaven and earth to subserve his welfare, that by 
the discipline and the trials of this life he might be led to 
seek after, and to attain to, that eternal life and immortality 
which God has promised to all them that love Him. But 
this brings us to the pith of the whole question, namely, 
“ Man’s Place in the Universe”; and our further remarks 
under this head must be reserved for part two. 

(to be continued D. I'.) 


A picture is reproduced in the Weekly Dispatch from the 
Cnnard Bulletin, March 13th, 1903, the first daily newspaper 
edited, printed, and published in mid-ocean on board of the 
ss. Campania. (See article by “ B ” for the picture referred 
to). The comments on this “ original title ” in the Dispatch 
are made from an editorial standpoint, and assert that “ it 
seems in a curious state of incompletion, and no doubt in 
time will be considerably curtailed.” 

I suppose (fancy a Zetetic supposing ! !) this uncurtailed 
monstrosity is of the class referred to by the late Richard 
A. Proctor, who says :— 

“ I am convinced that a large part of the perplexity which intelligent 
and thoughtful readers experience in the study of astronomical works is 
due to the incorrect proportions of the figured objects, orbits, globes and so 
on. 1 believe also that but for these monstrous pictures (italics mine) the 
charlatans who pretend they think the Earth a plane or the like would 
not find hearers, still less (as they do) believers. I know many worthy 
people far from wanting in abilities who only believe the theories of 
Copernicus, Kepler, and Newton on the score of authority ; not because 
the evidence in astronomical treatises seems to them convincing or even 
intelligible!"—The Sun the Ruler of the Planetary System, p. 456 . 

“ The curious state of incompletion ” being apparent to 
the “ editorial staff,” proves they know that it is an “ abor¬ 
tion ” or “ contortion,” and also that they know the contour 
to be absolutely false to Nature and fact, yet they dare not 
say so ! We have not the slightest doubt but that it will 
very shortly be “ considerably curtailed,” indeed there is 
no doubt it will be so “ curtailed ” as to be absolutely in¬ 
visible altogether, save it be on the “historian’s shelf” in 
the British Museum. 

That the “ picture ” is an absolute monstrosity ; and that 
the teaching of modern astronomy and geography respecting 
it is false to fact and practical mechanics is unquestionably 
demonstrated ; and “the charlatans who pretend they think 
the Earth a plane ” are again proven beyond all question of 
doubt, to be those who “ speak the truth, the whole truth 
and nothing but the truth,” when they say the Earth is a 
vast irregular non-rotating plane. 

And this very picture gives proof that the Earth is a 
plane ! It gives one fact. Yes, it is there. Look ! No won¬ 
der at the bewilderment poor Professor Proctor was in when 
alive. But the fact. Well, here it is ! The receiving and 
transmitting stations are 


What, on a globe ? Have you forgotten that it is admitted 
that “ in practice the plumb-line is perpendicular to the 
centre of the Earth,” i.e., the sea-earth globe on the outside 
of which we are supposed to live ? But no, of course you 
have not forgotten ; and no doubt you also remember that 
consequent on this fact follows another, namely, that on a 
crlobe there can be no such thing as TWO PERPENDICU¬ 



form the trick on a school globe with two sticks and so 
practically learn the truth of the whole matter, and then 
decide for Truth. “The Truth shall make you free.” 

“ MARCONI’S TRIUMPH.—The success of Signor Marconi in 
bridging the Atlantic by means of wireless telegraphy has been a matter 
of especial interest at Dover, as it was while he was carrying out his first 
cioss-Channel demonstration between the South Foreland Lighthouse 
and Boulogne that Signor Marconi made his first intimation of the possi¬ 
bility of transatlantic success with his system. This was in 1899, when 
even cross-channel wireless telegraphy was considered marvellous, so that 
it will be seen what strides the invention has made in three years. At 
the time he was experimenting at the Foreland, Signor Marconi informed 
a Dover correspondent, in an interview, that his only doubt concerning 
transatlantic wireless telegraphy was the effect of the spheroid form of 
the earth, but he believed he would overcome this difficulty.”—The 
Nottingham Evening Poet. 

We are pleased to know that Signor Marconi’s practical 
experiment has proved beyond all question that the conject¬ 
ural assertion of those who proclaim the “ spheroidical form 
of the Earth,” is only equalled by that other lie of Satan, 
who is the god of this present evil age,— “ Ye shall not 
surely die.” 

If the Earth be the globe it is taught to be, Signor Mar¬ 
coni could never have overcome the difficulty of “ earth 
curvature,” for he knows better than I do, that “ the current 
would have run to earth , and been lost,” and no messages 
could ever have been received or delivered. Punch spoke 
truth when he said : “ Many a man with brains beneath his 
hat, Swears the earth is round but finds it flat! ” 

All workings on the Earth’s surface demonstrate that the 
Earth is a Plane. The history of the Suez Canal proves that 
“ the spherical form of the earth ” (sea ?) was the hindrance 
of that canal being cut before. But, as in the case of wire¬ 
less telegraphy, a man arose to “ overcome the difficulty,” 
which existed only in the minds of scientists and not on the 
earth or sea either. M. de Lesseps worked to a datum 
HORIZONTAL LINE ! and proved that what Liebnitz told 
Louis XIV., in connection with cutting a canal to “ benefit 
the human race” and to “cripple Holland in its trade with 
the East,” was absolutely true to fact and Nature. I quote 
it as given by Liebnitz in a Memoire to the Grande Monarque. 
“ The statement that the level of the Red Sea is higher than 
that of the Mediterranean is a mere myth.’’ 



Every practical working, and experiment, either on the 
Earth’s surface—such as was conducted by Professor Airey 
on the banks of Loch Foyle—or on water as conducted by 
Professor Alfred Russell Wallace, indubitably demonstrates 
the approximate horizontality of both Land and Sea. 

In spite of these Facts sailors are taught that “in Plane 
Sailing the portion of the Earth traversed is considered to 
be a PLANE SURFACE, the meridians being represented 
as parallel to each other, and the parallels of latitude as 
straight lines crossing them at right angles.” Navigation , 
by Rev. W. T. Read, M.A., Headmaster Thames Nautical 
Training College, para. 19. On page 5 L under the heading, 

“ Great Circle Sailing,” we read “ recourse is had to approx¬ 
imate great ciicle sailing .” What is the result? Well 
—there, read it for yourself, and call it what you like— 

“ the vessel may be said to sail upon the sides of a many 
sided plane figure (a polygon).” Yet our sailors are given 
a Mercator’s chart to practically sail their ships by ! and the 
same book, page 32, laying down “the principles” of the 
chart, crams the sailor with the following : “ The equator has 
now become a straight line.” This clearly shows that they 
are sailing their ships on a Flat, Level, Horizontal surface. 
When, we ask, will these men own the true shape of the 
World ? 

We pause here to ask if that is a true statement of natural 
phenomena ? “ The meridians have become straight lines 

at right angles to it, and parallel to each other.” What! on 
a globe? No, my friends, the dishonesty of the thing is 
exposed by itself; for they have just had to unroll the chart 
“into a Plane surface”! Then it continues, “and the 
parallels of latitude also straight lines everywhere equal to 
the equator.” Certainly they can put everything straight 
and yet curved. Could “ learning,” so-called, go to greater 
lengths in deceiving people ? Is not the source , aim, and 
results of such “ learning ” apparent to everyone who loves 
to practice truth ? 





By “ Rectangle.” 

(continued from p. 177.) 

V.— Philology. 

It was formerly supposed that, as the various nations had 
been “ evolved ” from lower forms and combinations, so their 
language had also been evolved from the chattering of the 
monkey to the speech of man. “ Science,” has had to 
surrender to Bible teaching in this important matter. 
Not to make the subject too long, I need only quote 
from the Natal Advertiser, of 8th May, 1899, to show 
that this has been the case. In that paper a report of a 
lecture by the late Right Hon. Harry Escombe, Q.C., is 
given, in which the learned gentleman is made to say that 
“ Philological research confirms the statement of Scripture 
that once upon a time the earth was of one language and 
one speech.” 

J. Urquhart, in What Are We to Believe , says : 


“ We have seen how wonderfully modern discovery and 
research have supported the Book of Genesis in its state¬ 
ment about the threefold division of our race. From the 
three sons of Noah originated three families, which became 
in the course of ages three great centres from which the 
nations of the earth went forth to inhabit the broad lands 
of the continents and to possess the islands of the sea. 

“ But in the account of our origin, given in Genesis, 
something more is implied and plainly stated. These 
three families are closely allied. The old race of mankind 
we are told, sprang from one father and mother, Adam 
and Eve. The second race, that which re-peopled the 
earth after the Flood, were all alike the offspring of Noah 
and his wife. 

“ Now, here again the Scripture, more than 3,000 years 
ago, pledged itself to the truth of a statement, 




we should say, of any that could be made. It was a chal¬ 
lenge to all ages to arise and disprove it if they could. It 
dared to speak the last word of observation and of science 
generations before observation began to consider the 
various races of mankind, and generations yet again before 
the sciences were born which teach us to-day what we are 
to recognize as facts in relation to these things. Genesis 
taught these things, too, though it stood utterly alone 
and was opposed by dense ignorance and stubborn pre¬ 
judice. The wisest peoples of the earth had lost all know¬ 
ledge of their origin, and had not the slightest suspicion 
of the ties which bound them so closely to the races 
which they oppressed and despised. The unity of the 
human race is a purely Bible doctrine. If it is true, what 
does that fact mean ? Can we escape from the conviction 
that Genesis so forestalled science simply because it is 


“ But I am anticipating. We must first hear what 
science has to say. It seems hard to believe that the 
Negro and the Caucasian, the Europeans and the Hotten¬ 
tot, have had the same origin. But if we discover that 
it is so, it will only make the statement of Genesis the 
more wonderful, and the question still more urgent 
as to whence that statement came. I shall begin with 
the testimony of language. We have seen that mankind 
is ranged in three great families. Have these families 
any signs of common origin? 

“ It has been said that the Aryan and Semitic languages 
have almost nothing in common. This any student of 
Hebrew knows to be a blunder. Let me point out a few 
links of connection. The word “ call ” is a common one 
in the Indo-European languages, but the Hebrew is kol 
or col. We find a close resemblance between many Greek 
and Hebrew words, which shows that the two languages 
belong to 


Agafiao is Greek for ‘to love’; the Hebrew is Agab. 


Harao is Greek for ‘ to see the Hebrew is Ra ah. Ageria 
is Greek for 1 to collect ’ ; the Hebrew is Agar. Nousos 
and Nosos mean ‘ sickness ’ in Greek, a word from which 
we get our medical term ‘nosology.’ The Hebrew sheds 
some light on the origin of the word, as Noosh means ‘ to 
be sick.’ 

Take another ancient member of the Indo-European 
amily the Sanscrit. The Hebrew for ‘ one ’ is Ekhad, 
the Sanscrit is Eka. Ish means ‘man’ in Hebrew. Is ha 
in Sanscrit is ‘ master,’ and Is hi < mistress.’ But there 
are words which connect themselves with many languages, 
and bring the relationship close to ourselves. Take the 
personal pronoun ‘I,’ for example; the Hebrew is Ani, 
or Anoki. The Egyptian is Anok, the Sanscrit Aha, the 
Chinese ngo, the Greek Ego, the German Ich. Take the 
ebrew Auak, ‘ to strangle,’ ‘ to be in anguish.’ To show 
how language 


I have only to mention the Greek Anagki, or Ananki, 

' necessity/ or ‘ straitness,’ the Latin Augustus, ‘strait’ 
or ‘narrow,’ the German Angst, having the sense of our 
own word ‘ anguish,’ which belongs to the same family 
group. The Hebrew Keren answers to our own ‘ horn ’ 
and the Latin Cornu. The Hebrew Makhar is the Ger¬ 
man Morgen, and our own ‘ morrow.’ Khittah in Hebrew 
and ‘ wheat ’ in English have the same meaning. Parak 
is evidently a near relative of the Latin Frango and our 
own ‘ break. Akar, in Hebrew, means ‘ to dig,’ and it 
throws light on the Greek Agros and the Latin Ager (both 
meaning field ) and our own ‘acre.’ The ager and agros 
" as the digged place, and our own ‘acre’ is a measure 
applied to cultivated land. This list does not by any 
means exhaust the number of words which I might produce 
to prove our old relationship to the Jew, the Arab, the 
Syrian, and the Assyrian. 

(to be continued). 




Introductory Address delivered by 

I have much pleasure in introducing Lady Blount as the 
Lecturer this evening, as I am confident that she will create 
unflagging interest, even for those who may happen to dis- 
agiee with her views ; and that she will also be able to make 
out a case for enquiry into that aspect of modern aztronomy 
which appears to come into collision with revealed Truth. 
This is not an imaginary idea ; but has unfortunately proved 
a stumbling block to many sincere and intelligent persons 
by its apparent incompatibility with the actual statements 
found both in the Old and New Testament writings. 

When I was at college, I was of course obliged to study 
astronomy on the usually accepted lines, and afterwards took 
my degree in Trinity College as Moderator in Experimental 
and Natural Science; but it never occurred to me at that 
time that most of the principles involved were assumed 
without adequate proof, which I have since ascertained to 
be the actual fact. That these views are held by persons of 
great learning cannot be denied, but it must be recollected 
that Sir Isaac Newton’s views were not accepted by any 
University for at least 30 years after their publication, al¬ 
though learned men were quite as plentiful then as they 
have been ever since. What we want is logical induction, a 
faculty which many undoubtedly learned men are strangely 
deficient in. Without this foundation all the mathematics 
employed are really worse than useless. The result is a 
series of abtruse calculations as to the number of thousand 
years which must have elapsed to enable the light of stars 
which have burned themselves out to reach this earth in 
accordance with the now adopted wave theory of the trans¬ 
mission of light, &c. I have even heard a serious discussion 
at the Royal Society as to the manner in which the sun was 
kept warm, with which I shall not trouble, you because some 
of the conjectures are too absurd to repeat ! It is not Newton 
and Copernicus that have dogmatized in the manner now cus¬ 
tomary, but very much smaller men, who think to snatch 
a little reputation by abusing persons much more logical 
than themselves. 



What is most to be regretted is, that a sort of terrorism is 
now used to prevent so-called “science” from being criti¬ 
cized, as mere ridicule always frightens off most of those 
who are not pecuniarily interested, and an appeal to the 
breeches pocket does the rest. It is quite true that by the 
use of logarithms, co-sines, and cube roots, many an ad¬ 
versary has been silenced who really had much the best of 
the argument ; but those who are fighting for the integrity 
and sufficiency of the Word of God are quite prepared to 
sutler for their convictions, as they know that those will have 
to do who are not willing to go with the stream. 

When a subject is really understood it can be brought 
within the compass of ordinary common sense ; but those 
who know themselves to have a weak case naturally take 
refuge in mystery. Surely it is probable that the God of 
all truth would not make the most splendid phenomena of 
nature constant object lessons against believing the evidence 
of our own senses. Yet this has to be done' continually if 
wc would adopt modern astronomy as a really reliable science, 
that the most wonderful accuracy is daily shown in the 
calculation of tides, eclipses, and other natural phenomena, 
is quite true ; but the inference that such forecasts cannot be 
made without Pythagorean or Copernican theories is not 
only false, but an impudent deception, and ought not for a 
moment to be accepted any more than the sort of diagrams 
which are constantly used to illustrate popular expositions of 
some of the aforesaid modern theories. 

Lest it might be supposed that all great men have readily 
accepted a philosophy so antagonistic to Holy Scripture, I 
will only mention the names of Goethe and Baron Humboldt 
the former of whom described the Newtonian system as 
“ that universally diffused delirium of lunatics,” and the 
latter said that he was only hindered by his age from under- 
ta 'ing such a thankless task as would be the exposure of a 
series of delusions which were already known to such in the 
scientific world (or words to that effect). He was, doubtless 
aware that what Newton and Copernicus merely used as a 
working hypothesis to explain certain observed facts, has, 
since their time been exalted into the region of absolute truth,’ 
even when it leads to conclusions incompatible with the 
Christian religion in respect to things apparently endorsed 
by the most unimpeachable authority. I will now call &c 




The Daily Mail of Monday, March 16th, contained a fac 
simile of the front page of the newspaper published in mid¬ 
ocean on one of the Cunard steamers, the Etruria. 

It is illustrated by the diagram which we reproduce, as it 
so well exemplifies the lying pictures which are so commonly 
used to bolster up the globular hypothesis. 

We are always told that perpendicular means a line drawn 
from the centre of the Earth. But look at those two towers. 
They are not thus drawn, or shown; because, if they were 
they would at once expose the fraud before the eyes of all. 
Our eyes, however, are opened and are able to detect it. 
We have drawn two dotted lines to show how the towers 
should have been represented to correspond with their own 

th One’of two things is true ! Either the Earth is a globe 
and the picture is incorrectly drawn. Or it is a plane and 
the picture is a fraud ! intended to deceive the public. 

We know, of course, that the latter is the case ; and it 
had to be so drawn to avoid exposure. 

Then, again, the curve is not drawn to scale. We are 
told that we are “ always at the top” of this curve. Which¬ 
ever of these two towers is at the top, the other must be more 
than 378 miles below it. Seeing that light and electrici y 
always travel in straight lines, and the ether in wireless 
telegraphy proceeds out in straight lines from the trans¬ 
mitter in every direction, as though it were placed in the 
centre of a hollow sphere. How is it, we ask, that, these 
lines can go round a curve the radius of which is 4,000 miles, 


and equivalent, in this case, to a mountain of water 189 
miles high between the two towers? 

It will be observed that, in the illustration, the lines are 
represented as going from the top of one tower to the other 
in a straight line, parallel to another straight line on the 

It is clear that the picture and the hypothesis of a spher¬ 
ical Earth cannot both be right; and all our evidence goes 
to show that both are wrong ; while a plane Earth accords 
with all the phenomena and agrees with all the facts. 



By E. H. RICHES, LL.D., F.R.A.S., 

Member of the “ London Mathematical Society ,” 
late Cantab , etc. 

(continued from p. 85.) 

Let BD be a small portion of the earth’s circumference 
whose centre of curvature is A, and consequently all the 

parts of this arc will be on a level. 
But a tangent BC meeting the 
vertical line AD in the point C will 
be the apparent level at the point 
B ; and therefore DC is the diff¬ 
erence between the apparent and 
true level at the point B. 

“ The distance CD must oe de¬ 
ducted from the observed height 
to have the true difference of level ; 

or the differences between the distances of the two points 
from the surface of the earth or from the centre of curvature 

A. But we shall afterwards see how the correction may be 
avoided altogether in certain cases. To find an expression 
for CD we have Euclid, third book, 36th proposition, which 
proves that BC 2 = CD (2DxCAD); but since in all cases 
of levelling CD is exceedingly small compared with 2AD, 
we may safely neglect CD’* and then 



BC 2 

BC 2 = 2ADxCD, or CD =- . 


Hence the depression of the true level is equal to the square 
of the distance divided by twice the radius of the curvature 
of the earth. 

“ For example : taking a distance of 4 miles, the square 
of 4= 16, and putting down twice the radius of the earth’s 
curvature as in round figures about 8,000 miles we make 
the depression on 4 miles equal 

16 16x1760 176 528 

-of a mile = - yards = —• yards= — feet, 

8000 8000 50 50 

or rather better than 10J feet. Or, if we take the mean 
radius of the earth as the mean radius of its curvature, and 
consequently 2AD = 79I2 miles, then 5,280 feet being one 
mile, we shall have CD the depression in inches equal 

5280 x 12 x BC, 

-=8008 BC 2 inches. 


“The preceding remarks suppose the visual ray CB to be 
a straight line ; whereas on the unequal densities of the air 
at different distances from the earth the rays of light are 
incurvated by refraction. The effect of this is to lessen the 
difference between the true and apparent levels but in such 
an extremely variable and uncertain manner, that if any 
constant or fixed allowance is made for it in formulae or 
tables it will often lead to greater error than what it was 
intended to obviate. For though the refraction may at a 
mean compensate for about a seventh of the curvature of the 
earth, it sometimes exceeds a fifth, and at other times does 
not amount to a fifteenth. We have therefore made no 
allowance for refraction in the foregone formula;.” 

It is thus seen that the degree of convexity per mile will 
be eight inches multiplied by the square of the distance. 
This must apply to the surface of the water equally with that 
of the land ; but it must be remembered that with water at 
sea there is a constantly changing attitude ; so it is possible 
that an objection might fairly be made to this method of 



measurement of a distance of arc of the surface of the water. 

It might happen that if this mode of measurement were 
applied to a certain extent of standing water on the land, it 
might somewhat fail , inasmuch as the surface of the water 
might actually be a plane owing to the nature of the land 
on which it was. However, in the fen country of England 
there is a kind of canal known as the “ Old Bedford,” in 
length some 20 miles, on which an experiment was made 
in the following manner :—A distance of 6 miles was selected 
and from a point, A, a boat with a flag standing 3 feet above 
the water was directed to sail to the end of the distance 
(six miles), which we will call B. An observer with a tele¬ 
scope fixed at 8 inches from the surface of the water, sighted 
this boat, and pronounced the whole of it to be clearly visible 
throughout the entire distance. 

From this fact a conclusion was at once arrived at (and 
justly so—-Ed.), that the arc of convexity of the surface of 
the water was NIL; or, in other words, the surface of the 
water was a PLANE. 

Now, according to what was said as to the degree of con¬ 
vexity of any arc being equal to 8 inches multiplied by the 
square of the distance,—in this case, at the distance of 3 
miles from the observer, the boat would be floating on a 
surface ol water exactly 6 feet lower than the line of sight 
from A to B which was said to exist; and consequently as 
the boat approached the distance of 6 miles when once past 
the distance of 3 miles, it would seem only reasonable to 
suppose that it would gradually have ceased to be wholly in 
view ; or in fact to have been in view at all at the end of the 

This experiment may be found mentioned in a book en¬ 
titled Zetetic Astronomy , published by Messrs. Simpkin, 
Marshall & Co., London, where it will be found illustrated 
by appropriate diagrams. To the same work I am indebted 
for some informatton concerning an observation made from 
the Isle of Man across the Irish Sea. The distance between 
Douglas Bay (Isle of Man) and the Great Orme’s Head in 
North Wales is fully 60 miles. At an altitude of not more 
than 100 feet in Douglas Bay, the Great Orme’s Head, can 
be seen distinctly in clear weather. Now taking into con¬ 
sideration the convexity of the earth’s surface (the distance 
of arc between these two places is sixty miles), according 





to fhe calculation which has already been explained the 
centre of this arc would be 1944 feet higher than the coast 
line at each end : thus it seems natural to suppose that if 
the Great Orme’s Head is to be seen from Douglas Bay it 
would be necessary to be at an altitude of 1,944 feet at the 
latter place. How it might be asked, is this fact—namely, 
the possibility of seeing a something at one end of an arc 
of 60 miles from the other—to be accounted for, if the mode 
of measurement of the earth’s convexity be correct ? For, 
with an altitude of only 100 feet at the end of the arc (sixty 
miles) from which the observation is made, a something is 
seen at the other end of it. Many like observations to this 
have been made in different places, and similar results have 
been obtained which would support the theory of those who 
maintain that the surface of the earth is a plane. 

(to be continued.) 


Under the above heading several articles have appeared 
in The Clarion ,—the annexed extracts will speak for them¬ 
selves—bearing unmistakeable evidence of their aggressive 
tendency and the atheistic trend of modern so-called as¬ 
tronomical science. 

“ Agnosticism ” has been elaborated and supported by a 
class of individuals whose belief is fixed in their ability to 
judge all things ; and a deep rooted faith in the infallibility 
of modern science in its every branch and line, and especially 
the globular theory. 

“ The fool has said in his heart there is no God.” Thus 
saith the Scriptures. And though the agnostic does not 
say openly that there is no God, he says it in his heart that 
there is no such God as the God of the Bible ; therefore he 
comes under the Psalmist’s definition. The agnostic may 
even own that there is some sort of a god, but he disowns 
the God of the Scriptures, and he does not believe in the 
inspiration of those Scriptures as having come from God. 

This only proves the truth of the apostle’s statement that 
the carnal mind is enmity against God. It can take the 



word of man for truth—any extravagances which the astron¬ 
omer or scientist may utter,—but it has a special enmity 
against God’s Holy Word and Will. Apart from Jesus 
Christ and the Bible no man can rightly believe in God, nor 
can he know the truth about God’s character. 

The agnostic spirit has another operating motive, which 
goes to uphold whatever is called “ science ”—especially as 
against Bible teaching, and those Christians who attempt to 
uphold the Scripture-contradicting globular theory are not 
in a position to answer the impeachments which are laid 
against the Bible in The Clarion. There was a notable in¬ 
stance of this in a letter forwarded to us, which appeared in 
The Christian Commonwealth , attempting to answer The 
Clarion. The writer’s position was deplorable ; he was indeed 
handicapped with “ science, falsely so-called,” which (al¬ 
though doubtless with good intention) he endeavoured to 
carry hand in hand together with the Bible ! But, alas ! it 
made him feeble , and his reply, which otherwise was good, 
was not only unreasonable but ridiculously so on those lines 
where he endorsed Scripture-contradicting science. Yet we 
repeat that it is “doubtless” that the writers motive was 
charged with the good intention of upholding the truth of 
the Bible. 

The noted infidel, Tom Paine, truly stated that the two 
beliefs, “ modern astronomy and the Bible cannot be held 
together in the same mind, and he who thinks he believes 
both knows very little of either.” The Ed. of T. C. perceives 
the truth of such reasoning in the above statement, and he 
therefore naturally ridicules the untenable position adopted 
by the majority of Christians in professing to believe in the 
Bible, which contradicts the whirling globe theory, while at 
the same time they profess to have faith in the latter. The 
Ed. of The Clarion is aiding us to establish the fact that 
the Bible and modern astronomy are at variance,and we thank 
him for so doing, even though it may be that he is unwittingly 
being used as an instrument to drive half-hearted believers 
into the enemy’s camp. 

Now it may be asked, What proofs have we of the trust¬ 
worthiness, and authenticity of the Scriptures ? The proofs 
of their historical and internal trustworthiness and authentic¬ 
ity are so numerous and unanswerable, that they could not 
be called into question, unless all historical evidence were 


22 5 

doubted and denied. They are also proved in themselves 
by their excellent and pure teaching ; and that they are the 
production of inspired men from God seems evident from 
the following arguments:—(1) That no good man or men 
could have “ invented ” them, which would be wicked ; (2) 
Nor could wicked men produce such perfect teaching. 
Neither is it possible that they are the production of Satan 
or his evil spirits, from the same reasons, viz. : wicked beings 
would not inculcate good. It is utterly impossible to believe, 
therefore, (from a humanly argumentative standpoint alone) 
that they were written by others than the authors ascribed 
to them. 

The above is the 153rd question, from Questions and 
Answers on the Bible and Nature , by the Ed. of The Earth. 

It is a fact that the Bible contains sufficient light in itself 
for men to accept it as truth if they will only search the 
Scriptures in an honest and candid spirit, and with at least 
as much diligence and reason as they would exercise over 
earthly things. The Bible bears evidence within itself, and 
“ he that believeth ” hath the witness within himself. 

If we know its healing power and beauty we must acknow¬ 
ledge its potency. We pray that the Ed. of The Clarion 
may be brought to a knowledge of the truth, and to confess 
(as we have had to confess ) that he is a sinner, and that he, 
even as others, has broken God’s holy Law; and further to 
accept Jesus, the Son of God, with power as his Saviour. 

For unto Him all power is given, both in heaven above 
“ and in earth beneath.” It hath pleased God that it should 
be so. 

With respect to The Clarion the Ed. of The Earth has 
sent replies to the statements which have been made in the 
first named paper, but its editor has not inserted them. As 
space permits we will therefore reproduce our letters in The 
Earth , and we will give extracts from The Clarion showing 
how the false and so-called “ science ” of the day is leading 
men away from God and His truth to land them in foolish¬ 
ness, darkness, and death. As specimens take the following 
quotations : 

Extracts from The Clarion. — t£ THE UNIVERSE AND ITS 
CREATION.” By R. Blatchford. 

“ The theory of the early Christian Church was that the earth was flat, 
like a plate, and the sky was a solid dome above it, like an inverted blue 
ba in. The sun revolved round the earth to give light by day, the moon 



revolved round the earth to give light by night. The stars were auxil¬ 
iary lights, and had all been specially, and at the same time, created for 
the good of man. God created the sun, moon, stars, and earth in six 
days. He created them by word, and He created them out of nothing. 

.To day our ideas are very different. Hardly any educated man or 

woman in the world believes that the world is flat, or that the sun re¬ 
volves round the earth, or that what we call the sky is a solid substance 
like a domed ceiling” ?— The Clarion , April 17, 1903. 

4< Last week I gave a brief and imperfect sketch of the known universe. 
My object was to suggest that the Creator of a universe of such s^ope 
and grandeur, a universe of 20 millions of suns, must be a Being of vast 
power and dignity. This week I shall try to compare the modern idea 
of the universe with the idea given in the Bible, and to show that the 
ancient Jewish God, Jehovah, was utterly incapable of conceiving a 
scheme of creation so magnificent as that which science has revealed, 
bor it is to human labour, and to human science, and not to divine in¬ 
spiration, that we are indebted for the expansion and elevation of our 
ideas of the universe and its Creator. The universe as revealed to us bv 
man, contains 20 millions of living, moving, radiant suns, with all their 
wonderful revolving planets, comets, meteorites, and nebulae. The uni¬ 
verse, as revealed in the Holy Scriptures, consists of a flat immovable 
earth, covered by a solid dome of sky, in which are set a small sun and 
moon, and a sprinkling of stars, all of which were created to give light 
to man. The difference between the human and the inspired conceptions 
of the universe is too glaring to need any comment of mine. The uni¬ 
verse of the Bible bears about the same relation to the universe of fact 
as a candle to the sun. The scientific conception also is true, whilst the 
Bible conception is false.”— The Clarion , April 24, 1903. 

We should like to ask the editor of The Clarion whether 
he has examined into the truth, or otherwise, of the system 
of the universe as taught by modern astronomy ? We think 
he has not; and that moreover he shows a marked bias and 
leaning towards whatever “ science ” teaches in opposition 
to the Bible. He accepts the unverified statements of so- 
called scientists with the same unreasoning gullibility as he 
accuses Christians of doing, regarding the Scriptures. But 
the dictates of reason should teach us to believe in 
the Bible motto of “ proving ” things, and holding fast 
that which is good. 

The Clarion is right, we are sorry to think, in saying that 
many advanced “ Christians ” (we should call them recreant 
Christians) have gone over to science as against the Bible. 
All those who have thus unreasonably given up a part should 
in all consistency give up the rest, and join the camp of the 
infidels ; for traitors in the camp do more harm to the truth 
than open and avowed infidels. Evidently the Ed. of The 
Clarion belongs to the latter class, and it is a pity that some 




of the paid defenders of the Bible make such a poor show 
against him. But it is impossible for them to do better 
while they accept the infidel and God dishonouring system 
of evolution which is now so popular, and which has naturally 
sprung from the fabulous belief, of pagan origin, that we are 
living on a self-revolving and whirling globe. 

All communications and enquiries respecting this Magazine and the teaching it 
upholds, and all questions and matter for insertion, should be addressed to 
E.A.M.B ., 11 , Gloucester Road, Kingston Hill. 


The Ed. does not necessarily endorse statements made under the headings of The 
Earth's Observatory ,” Letters, etc., unless signed Ed. The Earth. 


Professor Hathaway Expounds His Theory in Reply. 

“To the Editor of the News.-—Sir, I have before me a copy of your paper 
of the 2nd inst., in which I see an article in regard to the ‘ Earth Question.’ 
As you have given space in your paper to the side of the globe believers I 
thought that the citizens of Waltham would be interested in reading something 
from the other side and by your courtesy I will submit the following : 

On or about the 21st of March and 21st of September the sun travels in a 
circle called the ‘Equator’ and is thus at right angles to the earth and sea at all 
points on that circle. This fact constitutes the standard measuring rod for all 
observations for finding the ships position at sea. If, for example, we are in 
latitude 20 degrees N or S, the altitude of the sun centre at noon the time when 
the sun reaches its maximum altitude at our position, on, say the 21st of March 
will be 70 degrees. If in 70 degrees N or S the altitude will be 20 degrees. 
From March 21st the sun travels in a northerly direction until it attains its 
greatest northern declination about 21st of June so that on any day except that 
on which the sun is on the equator the declination has to be taken account of. 
On Mav 1, 1895, sun’s declination was 22 degrees, 8 min. N altitude, sun’s 
centre 25 degrees 14 min., bearing W, required latitude. 

True altitude sun’s centre.25’ 14” 


64’ 46” S 

Declination.22’ 8” N 

Latitude .42’ 38” S 

In this case had the observations been taken when the sun was on the equator 
the latitude would have been 64 degrees, 8., but as the sun had gone 22 degrees 



8 minutes farther north that amount must be deducted from the position the 
ship would have occupied had the sun been on the equator. 

It will thus be seen that the right angle the sun makes with the surface of 
the ocean when on the equator is the basis uf all navigation. Now who ever 
heard of a right angle on a rotund surface. Try if you will to obtain that angle 
on a ball or search the books of Euclid and geometry and your failure will be 
equally certain. 

On a plane surface such as the ocean all is plain and simple ; on a convex 
surface of a ball it is impossible. 

Now let the wise men and those who believe the earth a globe, demonstrate a 
right angle on a convex surface taking that for the base of the angle. 

One more thing I should like to add which is this. We are told by the as¬ 
tronomers that the north star is so far away that it took the light of it 50 years 
to reach the earth. Light travels 180,000 miles per second which would place 
the star trillions of miles away but when we take an observation of the sun at 
45 degrees N or S we find the reading on the quadrant is 45 and an observation 
of the north star from the same place will read the same. Now there must he 
something wrong somewhere for two objects, one so much higher than the other, 
could not be seen on the same angle. 

This is only one of the reasons why we believe the earth a plane and I stand 
ready to debate the subject with anyone, but they must hold to the theory that 
is accepted and taught in the schools and not insert a theory of their own as 
Mr. Davis has in regard to the curvature. When they cannot defend their own 
figures their cause is weak.—Yours for the truth, C. L. HATHAWAY, Water- 
town.”—Prom the Waltham Evening News, Feb. 4, 1903. 

J. MARRIOTT, (Sergt.-Maj.), Shorncliffe.—This correspondent complains 
that in the last issue of The Earth , p. 182, twelfth line, he is made to say 
“ that the sun has progressed about 1 degree on its journey round the earth and 
that in his article the “apparent motion” of the stars becomes “ actual motion.” 

It is necessary to explain to our readers that the writer of that article, or rather 
manuscript, is a globularist who believes in the Chronology of the Bible but 
not in its Cosmogony. The Bible teaches that the earth rests on “ foundations ” 
so that it “cannot be moved,” and that the snn it is which moves round the 
ea.rth, and not the earfh round the sun. And as he, and we, wanted to uphold 
Bible teaching in one way or another, we took the liberty of altering those two 
words in his manuscript, which read: “the earth has progressed about one 
degree in its journey round the sun.” 

The M.S. was vcy long, and whilst we deleted paragraphs which we thought 
were not true to Bible Cosmogony, and are not aware that we altered anything 
except transposing the two words above referred to, namely “sun ” and “ earth,” 
we thought the transposition necessary, and that it would not affect the writer's 
argument on Chronology, which was the main subject of the-manuscript. 

We cannot, therefore, say it was a printer’s error. But if our correspondent 
can give us one unimpeachable proof that the earth has ever progressed “one 
degree,” to say nothing of 360 degrees, we will admit that proof in the pages 
of The Earth, and if we cannot expose the fallacy of that “ proof,” we promise 
further to tender him our apologies. We cannot say anything fairer. We 
thought we had dealt with him, both in his letters and in his report of his 
lecture, in a generous spirit ; but our good intenttons too often are unappre¬ 
ciated. Would Mr. Dimbleby—Ed. of Past'and Future —with whom he is in 
agreement,—would Mr. Dimbleby, we ask, allow him such a privilege. We 
think not; for it came to our knowledge a short time ago, that a correspondent 



of ours offered to write an article, or a letter, to Past and Future, showing up 
some of Mr. Dimbleby’s Chronological errors, to say nothing of his Cosmologi¬ 
cal errors. But the required permission was not granted. 

We trust our Shorncliffe correspondent will thus see that we dealt with his 
communications in a more generous spirit than is shown by some editors, and 
if he likes to offer us a proof of the earth’s motion, as suggested above, we shall 
be glad to print it; otherwise we think that this explanation of the matter 
must suffice.—Ed. 

“ SUNBURN AT THE POLE.—The New Zealand Shipping Company’s 
steamer Paparoa, which was. in Lyttleton Harbour when the relief ship Morning 
arrived from the Antarctic, anchored in Plymouth Sound at noon yesterday. 
She brought home the first member of the Discovery’s crew to reach England, 
and also one of the crew of the relief ship, Morning. 

The Morning’s crew said that they often found the heat of the perpetual sun 
oppressive, and that they actually became sunburnt. It was a curious experi¬ 
ence passing Christmas and the New Year in perpetual daylight and playing 
cards on deck at midnight with the sun beating down. Later on darkness be¬ 
gan to assert itself and midnight was marked by faint shadows like twilight. 

The only bit of green vegetable seen by the Morning’s crew on her voyage 
was a crop of mustard and cress, grown by the officers on a wet blanket, with 
Antarctic soil .”—Daily Mail, May II, 1903. 

[With reference to the above the Ed. would now draw the reader’s attention to 
the following paragraph, which appeared on page 28, in No.s 13 & 14 of The 
Earth, under the heading, New Map of the World. 

“N.B.—The Ed. has something to say about the Map, (i.e. the map 
which the Ed. reproduced by request), but this must be left till a future 

The Ed. has received important information from the South, which will appear 
in the Work to be published (D.V.) in the course of a few months, by “ Ze- 
tetes and the Ed. j 



13, Gwyther Street, Pembroke Dock. 16/4/03. 

Dear Madam,—With further reference to the above ; Mr. C. R. Evans, quotes 
Mr. W. Winckler, M.I.C.E., in support of the theory of a flat earth, but the 
quotation is not opposed to the “ globular ” view. 

It is quite true that an engineer does not make any allowance for the curva¬ 
ture. The following quotation, from the only text book I have by me at the 
present moment, explains the point quite clearly to anyone engaged in building 
operations. The authors are R. E. Middleton and O. Chadwick, both members 
of the Institution of Civil Engineers, the former a fellow of the Surveyor’s In¬ 
stitution and formerly Instructor in Surveying at the Central Institute of the 
City and Guilds of London ; and the latter a Consulting Engineer to the Crown 



Agents for the Colonies. I hope Mr. Evans will accept these as competent 
authorities—at least from the standpoint of engineering practice. 

“It is however possible to eliminate completely all errors due to curvature 
To this end it is only necessary to plant the level, not directly over one 
of the points whose difference of level is to be determined, but midway 
between the two. It is evident that by so doing, the error due to curvature 
will be equal in both directions, and that the difference between the two 
staff readings will be the true difference between the levels of the two 
points. The effects of curvature are thus entirely eliminated, and need no 
further consideration. The line of equal altitudes so determined may be 
treated as a truly level line, even in the most extensive levelling operations. 

“The above is the usual practice in levelling operations, and involves 
no error as regards physical results. If a railway were set out in this man¬ 
ner, and accurately level, the top of the rails would be a curved line, concave 
to the centre of the earth. In a length of a few miles this curvature would 
be very perceptible, but nevertheless a railway carriage on the line would 
not tend to move in one direction or the other, for the rails would at all 
points be at right angles to the direction of the plumb-line, that is to say 
to the direction of the force of gravity.” 3 ' 

It almost seems to have been written in anticipation of Mr. Evans’ letter. 

I am, yours truly, H. J. YOUNG. 

[It seems absurd to first assume the Earth’s curvature and then talk of “elim¬ 
inating the errors” due to curvature ! The curvature should be proved.—Ed.] 

41, Bintall Road, South Tottenham. March 28th, 1903. 

Madam,—Wishing to know whether I have discovered a fresh proof that the 
Earth is not globular, and feeling convinced that you are fully acquainted with 
all known proofs in that direction, you will no doubt be able to inform me 
whether my little experiment, and its application to this subject, has already 
been observed or not. 

I have at home a large bowl which is slightly convex outside at the bottom, 
so that if placed on a smooth surface it is easily turned round. Se-ing this 
bowl full of clean water one day recently, I happened casually to turn it round, 
and at the same time, whilst looking at the surface of the water, noticed that 
some specks of floating matter did not go round with the rim of the bowl. I 
then got a match and broke it into small pieces to represent, as it were, ships, 
and let them float in different parts of the water near the rim of the bowl ; then 
waiting till the water was quite still, gently turned the bowl round, and found 
that the water with the pieces of wood floating upon it was scarcely disturbed at all 
in spite of its weight (or as the glohularists would have it—gravity) on the bottom, 
and lateral pressure on the sides of the bowl, the same thing happening upon 
turning the bowl faster. 

It at once occurred to me that this being a fact, viz.. That water does not 
travel round with a revolving body though resting upon it. Therefore, if the Earth 
is a globe there must be immense tracts of ocean, particularly in the southern 
latitudes, not in any way land locked, which would remain practically stationary 
(excepting currents caused by wind, &c.,) and all steamers afloat on such portions 
of the ocean could let their fires go down, and allow the earth to pass on a la 
mode panorama until the desired longitude was reached, then getting steam up 
again, proceed North or South, as required, to destination. This, of course, 
would be a most economical method of getting round the “ globe,” and that 
such would be possible were the Earth a globe I think is beyond dispute, 
because the coast and land being the firm and solid part of the Earth must 



necessarily rotate with it during the diurnal motion, but water being mobile 
and comparatively free at the surface (and for a long distance down also) would 
be unaffected, except perhaps where in immediate contact with the land whether 
at the surface or lowest depth. I should very much like to try the experiment 
on a large scale, with miniature continents, &c., in correct proportions, for al¬ 
though a convex surface could not be used it would show that in spite of so- 
called gravitation, the adhesion of the mass of water would not be sufficient to 
permit of it being carried round with revolving solid portion. 

Perhaps you will make some comments upon this matter in the n.’xt number 
of The Earth, and with which I am very pleased ; and trusting the truths it 
upholds may gradually gain popular favour. 

I remain, madam, sincerely yours, V. A. WRAIGHT. 

To the Editor of The Clarion. March 27th, 1902. 

Dear Sir,—“ Faith in the Crucified and Risen Lord saves ”... is not a matter 
of Speculation. It is a fact that tens of thousands of men and women now 
living, also myriads that have lived in the past would have fully endorsed the 
above statement, which forms part of a letter, in The Clarion, Feb. 19th, 1903, 
signed “One whose religion has still bottom.” But speaking not only for 
myself personally, but also for all the members of the “Universal Zetetic 
So iety,” which I represent as Official Editor of its Organ, The Earth, we can¬ 
not endorse the following statement made in the same letter : 

“ If you are going to tie us down to Genesis, then Christianity had the 
bottom knocked out of it 200 yea s ago, when it was first proved that the 
Earth was round, not flat, and that it moved round the sun, and not the 
sun over it.” 

Now we maintain that the Bible is as scientifically accurate in its account of 
Creation as it is in setting forth Life Eternal, and Re-Creation, in and through 
Jesus Christ. Also, the' words of our Blessed Redeemer condemn the position 
of the above writer. Our Lord said : “ Had ye believed Moses, ye would have 
believed me, for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall 
ye believe my words ? ” 

What right have we to accept the offer of Salvation set forth in the Bible if 
we deny the teaching of the Saviour, and also the writings of Moses and the 
Prophets, who were the mouthpieces of the Deity, which the Christ endorsed ? 
The Christian’s acceptation of the globe theory is a fearful violation of his 
God-given reason ! In fact it is an untenable position, that can only be described 
as building “upon the sands.” If the Bible could be proved false in or.e 
line it would then be unreliable in other lines. 

But there is no “if” in this case; and that it could be proved unreliable is 
an impossibility. For “he that believeth hath witness within himself.” 

We si and bv the Cosmogony of the Bible as set forth by the Creator Himself, 
knowing assuredly that it is as reliable as His promise of redemption through 
the Redeemer, whom He has appointed for our salvation ; “ For God so loved 
the world (this only world) that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever 
believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” 

The Whys and Wherefores of the purposes of God, regarding His plan of sal¬ 
vation and His secrets relative to His wonderful Creative Works and Nature, 
may he as inexplicable in some respects as is the growth of a blade of grass ; 
hut, nevertheless, God hath revealed unto us sufficient to prove to us that the 
Scriptures are Inspired Writ, and wholly reliable in every line. And, to quote 
my own words in an article entitled “The Romance of Science,” to appear 
(D.Y.) in the next issue of The Earth -which magazine I edit— the veracity 


f lb u e T ! nay , iested b’ its Cosmogony" ; for true Cosmogony is the found- 

o all Revelation, and it confirms the evidences of our senses, which are 
Ood-given ! ’ c 

* P! a “ and motionless Earth is taught in the Bible. And God made two 
gteat lights (although light was created first) to divide the light from the dark¬ 
ness, and to give light upon the Earth. But this is far too simple for the tastes 
oi some . I he globe theory has raised a taste in the minds of the people for 
Fythagoran fables, and at the same time a distaste for the simple truth. Alas 1 
modern scientists” and atheists discredit the Mosaic account of Creation' 
ut they cannot disprove it—none of them could possibly do so 1 

i could write many volumes upon this subject (the Lord, in his mercy, having 
s own me tie truth regarding Creation), in fact I am thus engaged, but must 

cr[obe C theory 6 th ’ S leUer With 3 few <l l1estions to the upholders of the whirling 

Where did your globe come from ? 

Who made it into a globe ? 

Who was the man that found out that the world was a globe ? 

In what year was this found out, and where can the proof be seen ? 

Could you tell us how he found it out ? 

And oblige, yours truly, E. A. M. BLOUNT (Lady). 

T , c San Francisco, Cal. April 17, 190:1. 

r -tv " r- ?unt,—-Enclosed, please find Money Order for thirty-seven cents. 
Tor l he Earth , with which I am much pleased. 1 gave a lecture in this city 
o a large audience, on the “ Flat Earth.” There was a very lively interest in 
trie subject Our Boston publishing house is changed to 160, Warren Street 
Box A. Please direct accordingly. Your Bro. in Christ, 


[We always value the kind approval of Miles Grant.—Ed.] 


“Is the earth really round?” 

Lady Blount, at Chelmsford, the other week, attempted to prove before a 
large audience assembled in the Shire Hall, that the earth is not spheroidal, as 
astronomers are wont to teach, but, on the contrary, flat. 

Her ladyship is a woman of considerable attainments, and her position in 
tne academic world is recognised as an assured one bv those who are in it • 
and it is there ore very surprising that she should support an idea regarding 
ie s ape o oui eaith which lias always been looked upon by scientists and 
others as heretical in the extreme. And Lady Blount does not stand alone on 
her ‘plane. 

We are not contending that the earth is flat ; but from tin es most remote 
up to the present the theory that the earth is a plane has been observed by very 
ever , I’ e °P* c \ whose number, however, has in every generation been 
rather limited, for which we must be thankful. 

When the First Intelligence was communicated to man, and our ancient 
ancestors began to peep into the arena of inquiry, that First Intelligence of 
eirs mapped out in their minds a flat disc of land, surrounded by a great river. 
That was the first idea of the shape of the earth. 


2 J J 

As intelligence developed, and threw out its tentacle-like aims to g] a sp P |[ ' 
ther knowledge of what the shape of the earth was, it cast aside the belief which 
had hitherto swayed those earlier minds, and adopted the newer teaching viz., 
that the earth was not only surrouided by water, but that it also floated upon 
water. They still believed that the earth was flat. . , 

Ages came and went by, and that teaching was firmly fixed in the minds ot 
the people, till our nearer ancestors began to explore and to exploit regions 
beyond their own, and the more learned of them began to suspect that the earth- 
floatinir-on-water theory was incorrect. It was refuted as an optical illusion 

by the more venturesome of our semi-civilized forbears, who had in their rough- 

hewn boats sailed across the ‘ great river ’ and found land on the other side. It 
produced a ‘ riddle ’ which was not propounded for ages upon ages. 

Doubt curiously mingled with desire, and until the advent of the old phil¬ 
osopher Pvthagoras, of Samos, who lived in the reign of Tarquin, the last king 
of Rome,'no advance was made. Pythagoras declared that the earth was a 
sphere, and the people who flourished in those days being wise and learned, 
the Pythagorean teaching was admitted into the inner circle of learning as being 
the most correct interpretation of the riddle of the earth’s shape. From the 
Pythagorean time till now those who have declared the earth to be a plane 
have been regarded more as faddists than teachers. ,. 

Ptolemy, with his Ptolemic system, succeeded Pythagoras, with this difference 
—that whereas Pythagoras taught that the sun was a movab e sphere situated 
in the centre—this is in effect the Copermcan system—Ptolemy laid it down 
for law that the earth—a sphere—was fixed in the centre of the universe, and 

that theory was held for ages. , . ... ... T _ 

It is a difficult task to move the flat-earth theorists from their position, in 
spite of the well-known laws which govern the psesent-day sound teaching re¬ 
peating the shape of the earth, the former call to their aid certain specific ar¬ 
guments which would seem to rebut those held by the learned and educated 

since the days of Newton. . ,, ,, , ,, 

Now, how come we to know that the earth is a ball ? Because the field 
view—the boundary line of which is a circle in all parts of the earth—becomes 

wider as the height of the observer increases. . 

Again, on a wide smooth surface, such as the sea, the upper part of a dis¬ 
tant receding object remains in sight when the lower part has disappeared, 
proving that the earth must he a globe. , , 

Thirdly—and this is the most convincing proof of all—the earth has been 

circumnavigated by vessels starting always in the same direction. 

Now, your ancient ancestors did not jump from the flat to the round 
theory at a single spring. The idea developed gradually. They first ot all 
judged the earth to be an ‘ oblong cylinder ’—a very good idea of the earth s 
rotundity—and then from the oblong cylinder they thought-and all, or a 
great many, of the ancient scholastic academies taught the theory to their pupils 
—that the shape of the earth resembled a ‘ drum,’ which was getting very near 

the recognised truth. , _ 

You will see, then, that we have arrived at the round-earth theory by easy 
stages, each of the stages named in this article remaining uppermost in the 
minds of the quasi-learned for ages. . . 

The earth could not be anything else hut a ‘ball.’ The position of the stars 
settles that, for the farther north or south you go from any place, the position 
of the stars, their dailv path in the heavens, and the time of rising and setting 
are altered, and new'stars altogether invisible come into view as the traveller 

Against all these laws the ‘flat earthists,’ and in this class must be included 
Ladv Blount, sav that we ‘globists’ are all at sea in declaring that because 
navi orators have sailed round the world that therefore the earth must be globular, 
for the sailing round the British Isles would not make Great Britain ‘globular. 


THE earth’s observatory. 

It is true, they continue that ships have sailed from east to west, and vice- 
versa, hut never from north to south. 

The disappearance from sight of the hull of a ship at sea before the masts is 
a freak of the laws of perspective. 

The round shadow on the surface of the moon during a lunar eclipse is no 
proof that the earth is round, because it has not been proved that the shadow 
really is that of the earth. 

Again, say they, if the earth were a ‘ globe,’ the people in the Antipodes 
would be walking head downwards. 

The preceding are the principal objections raised by the ‘ flat earthists,’ which 
are more remarkable for their curiosity than their science.”—From Answers, 
March 28th, 1903. 

[In answer to the above the following letters were sent.] 

To the Editor of Answers. —In the current issue of Answers , for March 28th, 

I notice an article with the above heading, and asking the question, “is the 
earth really round ?” Perhaps you will kindly allow me to make a few remarks 
upon the same. 

I am glad your correspondent refers to the subject as a “ riddle,” and not a 
demonstrated truth, for he is very near the mark here. A riddle is “an enig¬ 
matic proposition or puzzle ; or anything ambiguous or puzzling.” Both Pianists 
and Globites alike find the riddle of the globe puzzling ; the former are puzzled 
to find where the proofs come in, and the latter are puzzled to find them. An 
enigma is something “obscurely expressed,” and sometimes, “a purposely ab¬ 
surd saying or question,” and not all true. The so-called proofs of the earth’s 
globularity are indeed particularly obscure. The writer of your article says one 
of the proofs of the “round earth theory ” (he means the whirling sea and earth 
globe theory, for a penny is both round and flat) “is, the farther north or south 
you go from any place, the positions of the stars, their daily path in the hea¬ 
vens, and the time of rising and setting are altered, and new stars altogether 
invisible come into view as the traveller proceeds.” A similar kind of phen¬ 
omenon is observable in a line of street lamps also ; along a level road or prom¬ 
enade. It may be noticed at most of our fashionable watering places if you 
start: at one end of the line, and fresh lights come into view as you go along, 
and those you saw at the first appear to dip, and finally vanish. This is due 
to perspective, the same as the appearance and disappearance of stars, which no 
more proves the earth to he globular than the disappearance of the lamps on the 
promenade would prove the promenade to be globular. If people better under¬ 
stood the laws of perspective they would see the weakness of such a “proof” 
of the globular theory ; but until they do tliev will puzzle their minds, or allow 
the astronomers to puzzle their minds with The Riddle of the Globe. 

As for the question of circumnavigation, some scientific teachers are now 
candid enough to own that circumnavigation is not a proof of the earth’s spher¬ 
icity. Your reporter shows that this is not a proof, for, as he well puts it in 
quoting my words, “ Sailing round the British Isles would not make Great 
Britain globular.'''' 

I don’t wish to make my letter too long, hut I should like to quote an ad¬ 
mission of this fact from a work called Elementary Physiography , by R. A. Gregory, 
author of Physical Astronomical Geography , Computor ol the Solar Physics Com¬ 
mittee, South Kensington, and F.R.A.S., page 110. He says : 

“We can journ *y round the globe, sometimes travelling on land and 
sometimes on sea, but eventually return to the starting point without at 
all turning back on our course. This would appear to be a certain proof 
that the earth’s surface is curved, nevertheless it has been pointed out 



that circumnavigation would be possible if the earth had a FLAT surface 
with the North Magnetic Pole at its centre. A compass needle would 
then of course point to the centre of the surface, and so a ship might 
sail due easL or west and eventually return to the same point by describing 
a circle.” 

So that Mr. Gregory, as a Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society, candid¬ 
ly admitted that circumnavigation is no proof that the Earth is a globe, for he 
further gives this as a “proof that circumnavigation would be possible if the 
earth were flat.” We respect Mr. Gregory for his candour, but his confession 
only makes “ the riddle of the globe” all the harder to solve. It is all plain 
to the pianist that the “ Riddle ” is for the other side. We can say the same 
of the other so-called “ proofs” which are offered us, but I fear that to do so 
would make my letter too lengthy.—E. A. M. BLOUNT. 

The wording of the above title and the trend of the article in Answers, (with 
the impossible presentment of a man measuring the outside of the so-called globe) 
would naturallv lead one to suppose that the writer had been reading The 
Riddle of the Universe, by Ernest Haeckel, Ph.D.,and Professor at the University 
of Jena. That this work is brought out in England under the auspices of the 
Rationalist Press Association pre-supposes that the author postulates a world 
which has been self-evolved out of eternal self-existing matter. The Answers' 
writer must however he credited with a belief in God, for he refers to a period 
when the First Intelligence was communicated to man, and he says that our 
ancient ancestors mapped out in their minds a flat disc of land surrounded by 
a great river, and in process of time they thought that the earth floated upon 
water. In the progress of the ages the more learned began to think that this 
theory was incorrect, and it was eventually refuted as an “optical illusion;” 
hut, as a matter of fact, the oldest account of the solving of the world-problem 
is in the Bible, wherein we are told that “ in the beginning God created the 

heaven and the earth;.And God made two great lights ; the greater light to 

rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also, 
and set them in the firmament of heaven to give light upon the earth.” The 
Chaldee version of Job xxvi. 7, reads : “ He layeth the earth upon the waters 
nothing sustaining it.” In 2 Peter iii. 5, we read: “By the word of God the 
heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water.” 

Answers? writer is mistaken in supposing that scientific knowledge of the earth 
and the heavenly orbs belong to to modern times. Even Haeckel says: “The 
study of the heavens is the oldest, with regard to the starry heavens, the motions 
of the planets, and so on, man had acquired astonishing information 4,500 
years ago. The Egyptians and Chaldeans in the distant East knew more of the 
science of the spheres than do the majority of educated people in this country 4,000 
years after them. An eclipse of the sun was astronomically observed in China 
in lhe year 2697 B.C., and the plane of the eclipse was determined by a gnome 
1,100 years B.C.” But we can trace hack still further; showing that 

Regarding eclipses of the moon and the sun, 

Our “scientists” modern in false colours run. 

Decked with honours they’ve pilfered, or not fairly won ; 

But let it forever be known— 

To Antediluvians this honour should stand, 

Through Adam, received from the Creator’s own hand, 
And Josephus tells us that, by God’s command, 

Seth wrote those e:lipse tables on stone. 


THE earth’s observatory. 

All these people acted upon their sense-perception that the sun (not the earth) 
moves , 

The globular theory is not ancient. It is modern, and absolutely atheistic 
in its trend; making our God-given senses of no account; telling us that, 
although we see the sun move, yet it does not move, but the earth moves and 
is rushing through space, in addition to other fearful motions, at the rate of 
about 19 miles every second, and yet we perceive no motion. Again, the 
Scriptures tell us that the stars of heaven will fall upon the earth; but the glob- 
ularists say that the stars are mighty worlds, nearly all of them larger than this 
earth. How can the earth, with a supposed diameter of 8,000 miles, receive 
the numerous suns of the firmament ? Can a whale rush down the throat of a 
herring, or an elephant ride on the back of a mouse ? 

How the position of the stars settles the theory into a fact that the earth is 
a •• ball,” is a piece of non sequential reasoning on the part of the Answers' 
writer, who says that the farther north or south one goes from any place the 
the position of the stars, their daily path in the heavens, the time of their 
rising and setting, are altered, and new stars altogether invisible come into view 
as the traveller proceeds. As a matter of fact the stars visible from London 
rise and set in a way not compatible with the doctrine of rotundity. If we stand 
with our backs to the north on the high land known as Arthur’s Seat, near 
Edinburgh, and note the stars in the zenith of our position, and watch for some 
hours, the zenith stars will gradually recede to the north-west. On Woodhouse 
Moor, near Leeds, and on the Yorkshire mountain tops, and Derbyshire, the 
same phenomena is observed ; also from the top of Primrose Hill, Hampstead 
Heath, and Shooter’s Hill. We shall observe the same stars rising towards 
our position from the north-east, showing that the path of all the stars between 
ourselves and the northern centre move round the north pole-star as a common 
centre of rotation—just as they must do over a plane, such as we know the earth is 
proved to be. 

Upon a globe, zenith stars would rise, pass over head, and set in the plane of 
the observer’s position ; “ rotundity ” is also disproved in what actually takes 
place, and is not hypothecated. 

The Editor of Answers kindly returned my letters, with the following note. 

2, Carmelite House, Carmelite Street, London, E.C. 
Madam, April 4th, 1903. 

I am in receipt of your ladyship’s letter and literature on the subject of 
the Globe. I regret, however, that the columns of Answers are closed to corres¬ 
pondence entirely, and I am therefore compelled to return your letters. But I 
am keeping the literature you have sent me as it is interesting reading. Your 
ladyship may, perhaps, accord me an interview one day for publication in 
Answers. I am, Madam, 

Your ladyship’s obedient servant. 

Lady Blount. ' THE EDITOR. 

When sending a copy of The Earth to my son a few months since, 1 could 
not help writing under the Scripture statement—“ Of old hast thou laid the 
foundations of the earth,”—the following. There is no mention in the Bible of 
the foundations of the sun, or of the moon or the stars. Why ? Because they 
were made to be suspended, and to move, or revolve, in the heavens as atten¬ 
dants and ordinances for the earth ; and therefore not necessitating the fixture 
by foundations. 



Your journal becomes more and more interesting as the months pass on, and 
there is even a fresh beam of astronomical light radiating from its pages ; the 
result, I presume, of research and the desire to direct the the thoughts of the 
people on the lines of astronomical truth as declared in God’s Word, and pro¬ 
pounded by the surrounding facts of His creation ; which are ever telling of the 
wonder of His works. Yours faithfully,—J. L. 


To the Editor of the District News. 

Dear Sir,—I have shown clearly what and where the horizon must he if the 
earth be a globe 24,000 miles in circumference ; we do not find it as stated and 
therefore must look for some other law governing the phenomena of objects 
disappearing as we recede from them, the bottom parts first. What is the 
horizon ? Let us clearly understand this first. It is where the sea and sky 
appear to meet in the distance, and this is always on a level with the eye, no 
matter how high the eye is above the surface of water the horizon can never be 
sjen except on a level with the eye. If you get a carefully bored tube, say a 
gun barrel, and carefully level it, you will find on looking through it that the 
horizon is exactly in the centre of the tube; if you depress the tube the least 
whatever you will see nothing but water; if you elevate it the slightest you will 
see nothing but sky ; it can only be seen on a level with the eye, and this will 
be so no matter what height the eye is above the surface of the water. Place 
the tube properly levelled on the shore, high enough above high water mark, 
somewhere on the coast where there is, say, 30 to 40 feet rise and fall of the 
tide, look through at low water and it will be level with the eye, look through 
at high water, it will be level with the eye. The same phenomena applies to 
objects horizontal as well as vertical. That is to say, long lines of rails that 
are parallel appear to come into a line central with the eyes both on the right 
and left and both appear to meet in the distance exactly in the centre of the 
eyes, forming as it were an horizontal horizon, corresponding with the vertical 
horizon as above described, and this always in a basin-like form. The experi¬ 
ence of all aeronauts confirms this. Professor Glaisher, late Astronomer Royal, 
who died last week, ascended in a balloon with the late Mr. Coxwell to a 
height of 7 miles, the highest ever known to be accomplished by any man. I 
have a pamphlet written by Glaisher at the time. This perilous voyage was 
undertaken for scientific purposes, the principal one being to see the shape of 
the earth. During this trip Mr. Glaisher found his arms powerless, owing to 
the rarified atmosphere and cold through which the balloon was passing. He 
tried lo shake himself but seemed to have no limbs. Looking at the barometer 
his head fJl over on his shoulder ; he got it upright by an effort of will and it 
fell again and he himself then fell down helpless in the car. Intense darkness 
then came over him, as though from some paralysis of the optic nerve, for the 
brain itself was working as clear as ever. Mr. Coxwell’s hands were benumbed 
and he had to tear the valve open with his teeth. As the balloon rapidly fell 
Glaisher revived, as one waking from sleep, and took a pencil to continue his 
observations. They descended outside Birmingham and soon recovered. Mr. 
Glaisher says that “quite contrary to what they expected, instead of the earth 
falling off at the sides it actually appeared to rise, and appeared to be a concave 
surface, like the rim of a shallow inverted watch glass, to the height of the eye 
of the observer, how high soever he may be, the blue atmosphere above closing 
over it like the corresponding hemisphere reversed. As we ascended the earth 
beneath us seemed to recede, actually to sink awny, while the horizon gradually 



lifts, a diversified slope stretching away farther and farther, to a line that at the 
highest elevation seems to close with the sky ; thus, upon a clear day, the aer¬ 
onaut feels as if suspended at about an equal distance between the vast blue 
oceanic concave above, and the equally expanded terrestrial basin below.” The 
law of perspective accounts for this phenomena ; the human eyes are a pair of 
perfectly paired stereoscopic lenses, such as no optician has yet been able to 
approach in perfection : the line of vision is a right line, both horizontal and 
vertical; all objects above and below to the right and left of the centre of the 
eyes appear to vanish into the eye-line at a distance proportionate to the distance 
the object is from the centre of the eye above or below, to the right or to the 
left, and this gives the appearance of a vault or dome above and a correspond¬ 
ing basin below, or to the right and left of the eye-line. And here let me 
strongly impress this upon the minds of many of our Zetetic friends, as well as 
theoretic, that there is no such thing as a vault or dome above, as so many of 
them talk about. I have frequently had to put some of our own school right 
on this point. The firmament above is parallel to the plane earth beneath ; the 
law of perspective entirely accounts for what appears to be a dome or vault. I 
am prepared at any time to prove this to demonstration, with instruments and 
appliances I have in my possession, to anyone who would like to take the 
trouble to come here. My next letter will deal with the shadow on the moon 
during a Umar eclipse. 

Ripponden. E. J. SHACKLETON. 

To the Editor of the District News. 

Si r » I have now been before the public, on the platform and in the Press, 
upon the above subject for 40 years, and during that time have met various 
kinds of opponents, but very few who understood either one side or the other 
of the subject, or that ever made a single experiment to prove anything prac¬ 
tically. And I take Mr. Colbran to be a fair sample of the opponents I have 
had to contend with ; 999 out of every thousand accept the Newtonian hypo¬ 
thesis, therefore I shall not bother further about it but follow the crowd. But 
with Mr. C. the boot is on the other leg ; there is not a fourth of the human 
race that accept the Newtonian teaching. There is no sense at all in this kind 
of argument. I heard the late Archbishop Manning say, in Exeter Hall, “Let 
me have the children of England under my tuition and I will make England a 
Roman Catholic nation in twenty years.” Therefore it would lie no use troub¬ 
ling further—the Roman Catholic doctrine would be right. For goodness sake 
if we are to get at the truth at all let us face the subject in a reasonable and 
practical manner. The round shadow thrown upon the moon during an eclipse 
(by the earth) ! What an unwarrantable conclusion to come to without the 
slightest examination ! Let us have a proof that the earth is a globe first, which 
has never yet been done. Mr. Colbran puts forward an eclipse, the masts of 
ships, the tops of towers, &c., always appearing first as we approach them. No 
man in his senses would expect to see the bottoms first, whatever shape the earth 
is. To say that this phenomena is caused by the earth being round is to ignore 
the laws of perspective entirely. Mr. Colbran mentions an experiment carried 
out on a six miles stretch of standing water, which showed the three-mile post 
to be six feet higher than the two ends. Evidently Mr. Colbran knows nothing 
whatever about it; he should give dates, names, &c., for the experiment he 
refers to, so that I might deal with it. I have been present and taken part in 
nearly every experiment that has been carried out on the canal which Mr. Col¬ 
bran no doubt refers to ; and with your permission, Mr. Editor, I will give 
vour readers a brief account of some experiments. But let me first point out 
the absurdity of a six feet rise in three miles on a ball. It should be six feet 
fall; there can be no rise from where you stand on a ball—it must be a fall in 



every direction. In August, 1901, Professor Yule Oldham, of King’s College, 
Cambridge, with a party of 60 ladies and gentlemen, paid a visit to the Old 
Bedford level, near Downham Market, for the express purpose of testing six 
miles of this standing water (this canal is 20 miles long, but there are 6 miles 
of it without an intervening object). I was unaware of this visit or should have 
been present. Some time afterwards a cutting from a newspaper, containing a 
short notice of it, was forwarded to me by Lady Blount, asking my opinion. 
It set forth that the learned Professor had read a paper before the Royal Society 
at Glasgow, and it would be published in the society’s journal the following 
month (it has not appeared yet) ; he stated in bis paper what Mr. Colbran says, 
that the three mile signal was six feet higher than the two ends, and that he 
had taken a photograph of them showing it to be so. I wrote a very polite 
note to the learned Professor (enclosing stamped addressed envelope), asking 
for some particulars, and offering to pay anything he liked to charge for a copy 
of the photograph. He never replied. I wrote again offering £10 for a copy, 
and a friend of mine wrote and offered £5 for a copy. No answer yet. I 
wrote again, pointing out to him the absurdity of a rise of six feet midway 
between Bedford Bridge and Welney Bridge, six miles, because if this was so 
there would be the same rise of six feet midway between Welney Bridge and 
Welshes Dam, another six miles of the same canal, which would make the sur¬ 
face to be a system of switchbacks. I then threw out a challenge, and do so 
now to Mr. Colbran (or anyone else), that the two end signals shall be fixed 
twelve feet above the surface of the water, and the middle or three-mile signal 
shall be six feet above the. surface; the tops of these three signals should then 
appear in a straight line when viewed through a properly adjusted telescope. 
Now, if twelve gentlemen, to be selected by both sides, declare that they see 
these three signals in a straight line, I will pay all costs of the experiment ; 
it on the other band they are declared not to be in a line the other side to pay 
the costs. I am still waiting reply. Will Mr. Colbran take it up ? Now, sir, 
instead of Mr. (I beg pardon) Professor Oldham giving his paper to the world 
as he announced he wou[d do, he and his party again visited the scene of the 
Old Bedford Level last August, and engaged a professional photographer, 
carried out a similar experiment, and this photo, like the first was promised to 
the world. We have tried every means to obtain a copy without avail. Why 
this cowardice ? Truth is truth. Why should anyone pretending lo be seeking 
it be ashamed to face it and acknowledge it, when he finds it? A large num¬ 
ber of vour readers are taking a deep interest in this subject, and with your 
permission I will follow it up with a letter on the law of perspective, and 
another on the cause of the moon’s eclipse. It would be too much to ask you 
to illustrate these, but they would be much better understood if accompanied 
with diagrams. Yours truly, 

Ripponden. k* J- SIIACKLETON. 


Sent to The Times , April 20th, 1903. 

Sir,— I have been waiting patiently for the protest which 
ought to have come from Christian Archaeologists anent 
certain remarks in your article Rhaviinurabi y in your issue 
of the 14th inst. 


THE earth’s observatory. 

The Jews, indeed, have protested against the implied 
insult to Moses, that he was indebted to Babylonian tradi¬ 
tions for some of the most noted of the events and principles 
recorded in the Pentateuch. But, are not Christians equally 
dependent on the Mosaic records in many respects ; and 
ought they not to be jealous when the vilest of all corrupters 
of Divine Truth are credited with the origin of much that 
is held for sacred amongst us ? 

It may seem a small matter to some, whether a code of 
laws, a “thousand years older than the Mosaic age,” can be 
proved to be superior to those which we have hitherto re¬ 
garded as the very foundation of just legislation all over the 
world ; but when the chief city and the civilization of Chaldea 
are actually given the whole credit, in point of priority, of 
Commandments which are stated in Holy Writ to have come 
direct from God Almighty, it is quite time to wake up, and 
defend the very foundations of the faith which we profess. 

One or two questions might, I think, be asked of your 
learned contributor, viz.: 

1. Why does he take King Rhammurabi so much at his 
own estimate , when the boastings of Nebuchadnezzar 
are very properly discounted as the ravings of an ig¬ 
norant heathen despot ? 

2. Does he think the authority of Father Schiel, O.P., 
sufficient to justify the white-washing of a city which 
is set forth in Holy Scripture as the very type and image 
of all that is deceitful and abominable ? 

I do not doubt but that much valuable information has 
been obtained by Eastern Researches during the last i 50 
years ; but at the same time it cannot be altogether irrelevent 
to refer to the opinion of scholars at a time when Lord 
Bolingbroke endeavoured to establish very similar ideas, as 
being deducible from then available records. 

In an elaborate answer, made publicly by Dr. Clayton, 
Bishop of Clogher, to his lordship, the following passage 
occurs, which I commend to the consideration of those who 
may be tempted to believe too much in the self-laudatory 
chronologies and inscriptions of ancient semi-civilized 
nations. The quotation is as follows : 


“ We have no history of the transactions in Egypt in 
any profane author, that can be depended on, until many 
years after Moses was dead,—for as Sir Isaac Newton, in 
his Chronology, remarks : before the use of letters the 
names and actions of men could scarcely be remembered 
above 80 or 100 years after they were dead ; and as there 
is no certain history, either of Egypt or of any other part 
of the world which can in the least be depended upon 
before that period of time, but what is in this Book of 
Genesis ; therefore, I take it for granted that this book is 
the first that ever was written in the world. 

I am, Sir, your obedient servant, 

And Senior Moderator in Natural Science, 
-j- () t j ie Trinity College , Dublin. 

Ed. of The Times. 

[Copy now addressed to the Ed. of The Earth.] 

Lord's Day.— The Organ of the Sabbath Keepers’ Union. 
Edited and co-published by the Ed. of The Earth. Price, 
One Penny, Monthly. Printed and co-published by Mr. 
S. M. Brown, Commerce House, Wood Green, London, N. 




II e have much pleasuie in recommending the above work. 

The booklet contains the three thousand words, and idioms, 
which are most used in ordinary conversation ; sufficient to 
enable you to talk French all your life ; no fossil philological 
peculiarities, but French as it is actually spoken in France. 
Grammar underlies each group of examples, and we think 
this a cleverly condensed method of teaching the French 


The Author of French in Three Months also gives Lessons 
in Conversational French to adults, at 




I’riends of the Ed. of this Magazine can testify to his ability 
and agreeable way of teaching, 

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co., 


22 , Budge Row, Cannon Street, 


Price of Appliances £! Is,, £2 2s., & £3 3s. 

Instalments may be arranged. 






Nos. 37 & 38. 



The following article will form a reply to several enquirers. 

“The heavens declare the glory of God.” In spite of 
“ the fool ” having “ said in his heart, there is no God,” the 
above statement, which forms the opening words of the 19th 
Psalm, is an admirable fact,' which^can be grasped and 
appreciated by all classes and kinds of God-fearing men and 

“ And the firmament showeth His handiwork.” These 
words are as true now as they were when they were written 
by the Sweet Psalmist of Israel hundreds of years ago. 

The Psalmist goes on to say : “ Day unto day uttereth 
speech, and night unto night showeth knowledge.” Let us 
listen to the “speech’ uttered, and profit by the “know¬ 
ledge ” shown daily. 

“ There is no speech nor language where ®ieir voice is 
not heard,” yet the heavens speak not in an unknown ton¬ 
gue, nor to any one nation, but the significance Of what 
they declare may be understood by enlightened men of 
various nationalities ; and without the gift or the cultivation 
of tongues. 

“ Their line (or rule) is gone out through all the earth, 
and their words to the end of the world.” This shows that 
the heavenly bodies have influence, power or “rule’’ all 
through the earth. 

“ In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun.’’ 

These statements harmonize with the statements made in 
tiie beginning of Inspired Writ, viz. : that the sun and 
moon are “ two great lights ” which were made by the 
Creator to give light upon the earth—and to rule over the 
day and over the night, and divide the light from the dark¬ 
ness—and also to be for signs and for seasons and for days 
and yanrs.” 




JI e have much pleasuie in recommending the above work. 

jfjf booklet contains the three thousand words, and idioms 
ch are most used in ordinary conversation ; sufficient to 
lable you to talk French all your life ; no fossil philological 
peculiarities but French as it is actually spoken in France 
Grammar underlies each group of examples, and we think 
s a cleverly condensed method of teaching the French 

The Author of French in Three Months also gives Lessons 
in Conversational French to adults, at 




Friends of the Ed of this Magazine can testify to his ability 
and agreeable way of teaching. 

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co 


22 , Budge Row, Cannon Street, 


Price of Appliances £1 Is., £2 2s„ & £3 3s. 

Instalments may be arranged. 



Vol. III. Nos. 37 & 38. 



The following article will form a reply to several enquirers. 

“The heavens declare the glory of God.” In spite of 
“ the fool ” having “ said in his heart, there is no God,” the 
above statement, which forms the opening words of the 19th 
Psalm, is an admirable fact,* which^can be grasped and 
appreciated by all classes and kinds of God-fearing men and 

“ And the firmament showeth His handiwork.” These 
words are as true now as they were when they were written 
by the Sweet Psalmist of Israel hundreds of years ago. 

The Psalmist goes on to say : “ Day unto day uttereth 
speech, and night unto night showeth knowledge.” Let us 
listen to the “speech’ uttered, and profit by the “know¬ 
ledge ” shown daily. 

“ There is no speech nor language where ftieir voice is 
not heard,” yet the heavens speak not in an unknown ton¬ 
gue, nor to any one nation, but the significance 6f what 
they declare may be understood by enlightened men of 
various nationalities ; and without the gift or the cultivation 
of tongues. 

“ Their line (or rule) is gone out through all the earth, 
and their words to the end of the world.” This shows that 
the heavenly bodies have influence, power or “ rule ■’ all 
through the earth. 

“ In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun.’’ 

These statements harmonize with the statements made in 
tiie beginning of Inspired Writ, viz. : that the sun and 
moon are “ two great lights ” which were made by the 
Creator to give light upon the earth—and to rule over the 
day and over the night, and divide the light from the dark¬ 
ness—and also to be for signs and for seasons and for days 
and yaaps.” 



The Book of Job is supposed by many students not only 
to be the oldest book in the Bible, but the oldest book in 

Different stars, and constellations are referred to and named 
in it by names which are familiar to us, and it is evident 
that the knowledge of pure astrology (which was originally 
one and the same thing as astronomy) has been handed 
down to us from the Creator, through Adam and Seth. 
Josephus informs us that to the antediluvians we are indebted 
for very much that is known on this subject. 

He states that Adam was instructed by the Creator Him¬ 
self who ordered Seth to write the rudiments of the know¬ 
ledge regarding the heavenly bodies which He had imparted 
to Adam upon permanent tables of stone, which Josephus 
says he had himself seen. 

And these tables included a tabulation of eclipses. 

The path of the moon is like the path of the sun—a 
spiral—and when the moon’s path crosses that of the sun, 
there is an eclipse, if both bodies are in conjunction. 

We believe that knowledge relating to the stars as “signs” 
has to some extent ceased, or been perverted. 

The sign of the “Star in the East” was understood by 
wise men, or Magi, when our Lord was born on earth {Matt. 
ii. 9). Since then we have no inspired record of men being 
guided by the stars ; but it is quite possible that a deeper 
knowledge may be imparted to faithful followers of the Truth 
respecting God’s Works in Creation. 

When we study the Word of God, and consider the perfect 
order of the universe, we cannot help perceiving a perfect 
and divine precision underlying all visible things created ; 
and an invisible power behind the scenes, directing and 
governing the whole. Even the weakest of sin-crippled 
human intellect can scarcely fail to see the Creator’s care 
of, and provision for, His creatures, if they only study His 
Works. Our Lord told us that the hairs of our heads are 
numbered, as also are the stars in heaven above. 

But in addition to this we have the sure testimony of 
Inspired Writ in Isa. xl. 26, wherein the prophet by power 
of the Holy Spirit says : 

“ Lift up your eyes on high, and see who hath created 
these, that bringeth out their host by number. He caileth 
them all by name ; by the greatness of His might, and 




for that He is strong in power, not one is lacking.’’ (R.v.) 

The psalmist also states that “ He telleth the number of 
the stars ; He giveth them all their names.”— Pr.cxlvii^fR.V.) 

The heavens are described in Scripture as “ spread out 
as a canopy or tent ”—and so do they appear. 

The outstretched heavens above appear a “ dome,” 

To everyone on earth, where’er he roam. 

In the beginning it appears that Draco was the Polar star, 
the change having taken place “ owing to the slow recession 
of what is calledthe pole of the heavens. The same move¬ 
ment which has changed the relative positions of these two 
stars has also caused the constellation of the Southern Cross 
to become invisible in northern latitudes. The Southern Cross 
was just visible in the latitude of Jerusalem at the time of the 
first coming of our Lord. Since then, through the gradual 
recession of the Polar star, it has not been seen in Northern 
latitudes.” See The Witness of the Stars, by Dr. E. W. 

The sun takes his course through the Heavens, passing 
through the twelve signs of the Zodiac, or about one sign 
for each month. 

The sun’s path through the constellations is called the 
ecliptic. But there is also an annual difference, because 
the sun does not come back exactly to the same spot in the 
sign when he commences the year, but a little behind. If 
the fixed stars daily revolved around the earth at exactly 
the same rate of speed as the sun (which they do not), and 
if the sun started at exactly the same place each succeeding 
year, the signs would correspond with the months, and cal¬ 
culations regarding star motions would be simplified. 

The sun passes through the twelve signs every year, but 
in consequence of the slow precession of the equinoxes the 
sun commences the year in the same sign for centuries. 

The celestial equator is the sun’s path around the heavens, 
at the vernal or the autumnal equinox, and if it were poss¬ 
ible to stand in the centre of this great circle, the stars and 
sun and moon would appear to move around without 

Published by Massrs. Eyre & Spottiswoode, Great New Street. 



ever rising or setting. But both north and South of the 
equator the stars rise and set obliquely. On the equator 
they appear to rise and set at right angles to the spectator. 

The points where the two great circles cross each other, 
or intersect, are called the equinoctial points and the slow 
and gradual movement of these points is termed the “ pre¬ 
cession of the equinoxes.” 

The relative speeds and various motions of the heavenly 
bodies are governed by their various heights and declinations. 
“ The more rapidly a star or planet revolves, and the higher 
its distance from the earth, and the greater its distance from 
the centre of revolution, and vice versa, the more slowly a 
star goes around and above the earth, and the less is its 
height above the earth and the less its distance from the 
centre of revolution. Thus their velocities are proportionate 
to their heights, and to their distances from the North Cen¬ 
tre.” But to make their daily circles “ Zetetes ” states that : 
the whole of the “ ethpr,” or whatever other name we like 
to give to the subtle matter above our atmosphere which 
fills all the space between the earth’s plane surface and the 
firmamental vault of heaven—and in which all the heavenly 
bodies are contained and move, the whole substance of this 
subtle fluid is in a state of flux, like a great stream continu¬ 
ally going around the polar centres, and carrying all the 
heavenly bodies with it at various heights, according to their 
different densities, all being light and comparatively small 
bodies. But this flux is not like an ordinary stream where 
all the currents flow at the same general level and rate, nor 
is it like those streams' which flow quicker in the middle 
and slower at the sides, but rather, in shape at least, it is 
something like the great Maelstrom, or whirlpool, off the 
coast of Norway ; that is, like a great funnel with the tube 
or hole pointing downwards through which the mighty cur¬ 
rent flows into unknown subterranean, or submarine regions. 

I his explains also the action of the dipping needle. 

A correspondent owns that “ the sun appears to travel in 
a daily circle around the heavens, but this is only an optical 
delusion and that it is really the earth that is moving.” 

Now with all due respect to the one who makes the above 
statement ; in reply to his query as to how we can disprove 
this. I should like to ask him and others of the same mind 
if they can prove that the apparent motion of the heavenly 


bodies is mot real. Experimental tests have been made to 
see if the earth has any motion, and no motion such as is 
assumed by the astronomers has ever been discovered. Why 
then should we not believe that the “apparent” motion of 
the heavenly bodies is real ? We want something better 
than the unfounded assumptions of modern astronomers. We 
can see the heavenly bodies move, and being only compara¬ 
tively small bodies of light revolving round and above the 
earth in the great ethereal stream, it is to us much more 
reasonable to believe that these ‘ lights” are in motion circling 
over the earth, as they appear to do, than to believe that a 
ponderous body, like the earth, weighing millions upon mill¬ 
ions of tons should be suspended in space like a feather; rush¬ 
ing away through “ space” in its so-called orbit, and tumbling 
topsy turvey, carrying us all head over heels in its regular 
and periodical revolutions while tearing away forever round 
the sun ! It is absurd and we cannot believe it. 

This then is our reply for the present to correspondents 
who merely affirm that “ although the sun appears to travel 
a daily circle it is only an optical delusion.” 

We have given proof that the delusion is on the other 
side. It has been proved in The Earth , by mathematical 
calculations as well as by the evidence of our senses, that 
the sun is neither large enough nor high enough to light 
all the earth at one time but only about one half of it. And 
this is not only owing to the comparatively small size of the 
sun, but as has been shown by “ Zetetes,” it is also owing 
to the fact that when the rays of the sun strike our atmos¬ 
phere they are refracted, or bent out of a straight path ; and 
when by perspective the sun goes sufficiently far off from 
any particular locality its rays are deflected by the atmos¬ 
phere so that they do not reach the earth at all, and darkness 
ensues. This is a wise provision of the Creator that when 
darkness comes over the earth, the creatures of His power 
being only of limited strength may take their nightly repose 
and be refreshed with sleep. The sun still going his daily 
round lights up other parts of the earth far distant from us 
and comes round next morning to wake us with his bright 
and cheering rays. Thus again do the “ h«p.vens declare 
the glory of God and the firmament showeth His handiwork.” 

(to be continued.) 


man’s place in the universe. 


(continued from p. 210). 


We have hitherto been concerned chiefly with the ideal 
universe of the New Astronomy, for which we have found 
no adequate proof offered in fact. The heading of Mr. 
Wallace’s paper would have been more harmonious with his 
subject had it been “ Man’s Place in the theoretical Universe 
of the Astronomer.” But it is Man's Place in THE Uni¬ 
verse; so that we have a right to expect the Universe ot 
Fact and not a Universe of Fiction. This is a very different 
thing ; yet the Fiction is generally assumed and the Fact 
quietly ignored, as though there were no question about it. 
Yet Mr. W. is credited in some departments of science as 
a keen observer of facts. Why then does he reason here on 
a hypothetical basis ? If men will reason so, and start out 
on the basis of a fictitious universe, they are likely to go 
wrong, not only with respect to “Man’s Place” therein, but 
also with respect to man's proper nature. 

Those who look upon the Universe as a conglomeration 
of blind or evolutionary forces, unconsciously acting on 
matter, cannot offer man anything better than a final and 
a fatal dissolution. Their philosophy is a kind of physical 
fatalism, over the portals of which may be inscribed—“All 
hope abandon, ye who enter here.” Grant Allen, writing 
of the so-called Laws of Nature, says : 

“ They take no heed of man or man’s deserving, 

Reck not what happy lives they make or mar. 

Work out their fatal will unswerved, unswerving, 

And know not what they are ! ” 

What a dismal outlook for man on this hypothesis ! But 
I am glad to note that Mr. W. does not seem to accept this 
blank outlook of physical fatalism. He says he takes “ the 
view of those who believe in some intelligent Cause at the 
back of this universe, some creator or creators, some designer 
or designers.” 

This, while it renders hope possible for man, is not satis¬ 
factory. It is neither clear nor philosophical. We need 

man’s place in the universe. 247 

something for faith to rest upon better than “ some Intelli¬ 
gent cause,” even though it have a capital “I.” We need 
an Adequate Cause; and that cause must be One , not a 
plurality, for the Universe is one. But Theosophy teaches 
that men may be their own “ creators,” their own saviours, 
and the “ designers ” of their own salvation and destiny ; 
hence the plurals are deftly inserted in the above quotation. 
Here we have the “ gods many and lords many ” ot the apos¬ 
tle’s day. But as Paul says “ To us (primitive Christians) 
there is but One God, the Father, of whom are all things, 
and we in Him ; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are 
all things, and we by him. Howbeit there is not in every 
man that knowledge.”—1 Cor. viii. 6. This is the simple 
but grand creed of primitive Christianity, “ howbeit there is 
not in every man this knowledge,” and even Grant Allen, 
whom Mr. W. quotes, says : 

“ The purely monotheistic conception of a single supreme God, the 
Creator and upholder of all things, had been reached centuries before 
the birth of the Man Jesus. Christianity borrowed from Judaism this con¬ 
cept,and,humanly speaking, proceeded to spoil it by its addition of the Son 
and Holy Ghost.” 

Mr. Allen in his doctrine of Evolution fails to discriminate 
between a pure and primitive Christianity, which held to the 
grand conception of One only God who created the Universe, 
and a subsequent and corrupted form of Christianity which 
added on the pagan doctrine of a Trinity of three equal 
and co-eternal personal Gods. But, nevertheless, I commend 
to Mr. W.’s notice what Mr. Allen acknowledges is a “ sub¬ 
lime ” conception ; and I submit that the prophets of Israel, 
the teachers who gave us this “ magnificent concept”—even 
centuries before the birth of that unparalleled Man who 
claimed to be (not God, but) the Son of God—these teachers, 
I say, must be worthy of our respectful attention in regard 
to what they have to say, both of the Universe at large and 
man’s little place in that Universe. 


Under this heading Mr. Wallace has made some good 
points to show that the earth alone is fit for human hab- 

2 4^ man’s place in ti-ie universe. 

itation. But his frequent reference to the earth as a “ planet,” 
with other astronomical fictions detracts somewhat from their 
value. He discusses the adaptability of “ other planets ” 
for the development of organic life. It is of course with him 
development —evolution—for creation as revealed in the 
Bible is out of the question in his articles. Yet if there 
be anything tangible behind the “magnificent concept’’ of 
the Jewish teachers, Mr. W. must own that such Creation 
was not only possible but highly probable. However, we 
will briefly notice his reasons for thinking that the earth 
a one is adapted for life ; and that the required conditions 
can be found “ on no other planet.” 

These conditions refer to the presence of an atmosphere, 
suitable temperatures, and the presence and circulation of 
plenty of water. We need water, of course at a temperature 
somewhere between the freezing and boiling points ; so that 
it would not do to be too far off the sun, like Neptune, or 
too near like Mercury. 

If all the waters of the earth were frozen we should die ; 
and if they approached boiling point it would be equally 
detrimental ! The temperature of “ space,” we are told, is 
about. 273 0 C., while that of the sun is about 9,000° C.” 
Accoiding to this it must be pretty warm near the sun, yet 
when we ascend a mountain, and so get nearer to that orb, 
we find it is colder. This reminds us of the assertion of 
the astronomer s that we are about three millions of miles 
nearer to the sun in winter than in summer ; as though it 
w'ere not always winter somewhere ! 

But to return to Mr. Wallace. He realizes what a com¬ 
bination of favourable conditions must exist “ to preserve on 
the surface of a planet a degree of heat which shall never 
for any considerable time fall below o° C., or rise above, 
say 75° C. And these narrow limits he proceeds to affirm 
must be continuously maintained, not for hundreds or 
thousands only, but for millions, perhaps for hundreds of 
millions of years. ’ (Italics, his.) There you have it! 

Hundreds of millions of years ” ! I should much like to 
see the tabulation of some of these “ millions of years,” 
with the events on the earth answering thereto ; and some 
of the eclipses, or transits, in the heavens thrown in. How 
these “ scientists ’ talk, and write of millions of miles, and 
millions of years ! Of course it looks big and “ scientific.” 

man’s place in the universe. 


It is comforting, however, to know that we are (1) at a 
suitable distance from the sun, that its rays may “evapoiate 
sufficient water to produce clouds, rain, and a system of 
river circulation.” (2) That our “ atmosphere is of sufficient 
extent and density ; ” and since this is supposed to be ‘ de¬ 
pendent on the mass of a planet,” Mars is “ unsuitable ’ as 
a place to live in. We think so too, and we must, therefore, 
crive up the expectation of any “ message from Mars.’’ We 
Zetetics say the same, as I have said before ; and I am glad 
to find at least one scientist on the side of Zetetics as regards 
this planet. If Mars be unsuitable for life, as we think it 
is it must be extreme folly to expect “ messages therefiom. 

’i am also glad to find that Mr. W. says The want of 
a satellite (like our moon) may alone render Venus quite 
unsuitable for the development of high forms of life. It 
is, therefore, fortunate that we were not born on Venus. 
Let us hope we never shall be ; though we may notice, in 
passing, it is again, and everywhere, “ development, or 
evolution, which Mr. W. advocates. And this assumes “ re¬ 
incarnation.” (4) The average depth of our ocean is further 
said to be correct, being “ about thirteen times that of the 
land which rises above their level.” These oceans aie 
“ level ” then, which we think is a good point in our favour ; 
and they help to keep up “uniform temperatures during the 
whole period (‘ millions of years’) of the development of life 
upon the earth.” We are further informed that “ It is ex¬ 
tremely improbable that this remarkable condition obtains 
in any other planet.” We think so too, “ extremely impiob- 
able” ! (5) Lastly, we are assured that the inhabitants ot 

this “ planet,” the earth, have a sufficient and “ uninterrupted 
supply of atmospheric dust.” How and why this is so is 
fully explained in Mr. W.’s Wonderful Century; but as 1 
have not seen a copy of this wonderful work I cannot give 
Zetetics the explanation. But speaking locally, and for this 
season of the year—summer—I can assure my readers that 
in Leicester we do have an “ uninterrupted supply of at¬ 
mospheric dust ” ; and more, I think, than is needed for all 
sanitary purposes. How and why this is so I need not 
pause to explain ; however, it is consoling to know that 
we are all well supplied in this respect ; and this may 
account in some degree for the fact that unvaccinated 
Leicester not only has a low death rate but is more free 



from small-pox than many other towns. Mr. Wallace 
tells us that plenty of dust, with “ constant winds to 
distribute it,” is “ among the permanent essentials of a 
GLOBE fitted for the development of intellectual life.” 
Under the circumstances this is about the best proof we 
have seen that the earth is a globe whirling through 
“ space,” and so causing plenty of dust to be flying about 
everywhere. This may further explain why the astronomers 
generally throw dust in our eyes when we seek for proof of 
the earth’s sphericity. ZETETES. 

(to be continued.) 


Floods and Flats go together; and our month of June 
has just afforded us most abundant proof of the above 
aphorism in tremendous downpours of rain, which have con¬ 
verted whole villages into lakes, such that the roads have 
disappeared and the inhabitants have been driven to the 
necessity of getting about in boats. 

This adds one more to the long list of proofs that the 
earth is at once flat and stationary. If you doubt this try 
and make a flood on a pile of cannon shot, and see how 
you get on. Or you may try the Great Wheel, placing an 
immense sponge bath at top in which you may even swim 
about; then let the wheel be turned just a trifle, and lo ! 
away goes your lake at the top, and you may have a narrow 
escape from being swept down with the torrent of water out of 
your (till then) convenient swimming bath. 

Perhaps you prefer to have your sw imming bath at the 
bottom of the wheel. If so, we turn the wheel in the fashion 
of a grindstone, and once more the water, or flood, is thrown 
out at a tangent, and yourself with it, and you may have time 
to reflect why a grindstone disproves the rotation of the 

The earth, you observe, is said to rotate and carry the 
oceans round with it ; but the grindstone throws it all off— 
and why ? Simply because it cannot carry it round of 
course, and also because water is that sort of stuff which 



cannot be carried round but insists on making its own flood 
there and then, on the instant, and in the exact compass and 
locality which suits it. Thus the grindstone shoots the 
water off at the bottom because it is water flood and flat , 
and flatly refuses to alter its flat shape to suit the grind¬ 
stone, which is round. 

You see flat and round deliberately fall out and the flat 
flood falls flat because it will not fall any other way, turn you 
the grindstone ever so wisely, so swiftly, so coaxingly, or 
any other way you please. 

just so with the earth. It cannot turn and carry the oceans 
round with it, because the oceans are flood water, and on 
the outside of it, like the water on the grindstone, Or the 
swimming bath at the bottom of the great wheel, and of 
course the motion merely displaces the water or flood and 
causes it to seek a fresh abiding place. If the earth turned 
then the same would occur with the oceans—they also would 
be displaced, and would have to seek fresh abiding places. 

The persistent rain of June has therefore done good work 
in affording ample proof by its numerous and more or less 
disastrous floods, that such floods must have local flats to 
rest upon, and that such flats—as meadows and miles of 
submerged country—must in their turn be stationary, and 
totally the reverse of parts of a spinning and rotating earth. 
No doubt the whole area of Great Britain has suffered from 
the heavy rainfall, and the inconvenient floods which have 
been caused by it, but certain localities are specially men¬ 
tioned as heavily visited. 

Royal Windsor always suffers severely on these occasions, 
and the races at Royal Ascot have also been seriously shorn 
of their splendour. It will, indeed, be strange if these 
visitations of rain and flood fail to exercise some correcting 
influence on the minds of those loyal residents in the Royal 
Borough who still persistently maintain the rotation, and 
globular shape of the earth, all of which is once more dis¬ 
proved by these very floods of the month of June, I 9 ° 3 - 

Not only has England been the flat recipient of this con¬ 
tinuous downpour, but the Continent has also made its lap 
for a few drops, whilst even New York has stood still with 
its umbrella on the stretch for fear it should be given the 
trouble to dust. 

Then earthquakes have also been alternating with the 



showers, as if to make the whole visitation the more im¬ 
pressive. Several sharp shocks of earthquake have been felt 
in Wales, and slight movements of the earth have been 
experienced even in England proper, all pointing to the 
same conclusion, viz. : that the earth must be stationary, or 
else the very slight shocks could not be felt at all. Those 
in Wales were not slight, but very marked indeed, and as¬ 
sumed quite a threatening aspect ; whilst the lesson they 
teach is always one and the same, viz. : that the earth is fixed 
and stationary, but liable to be locally shaken—the faintest 
tremour of which can be detected, and its direction usually 

There are now certain instruments made which detect 
earthquakes—no matter how slight they may be—and it 
follows as an argument, on the pianist side of the question, 
that these delicate instruments would be useless on a flashing 
and rotating globe. It is necessary for the earth to be 
stationary in order to permit such delicate instruments to 

All this would be impossible on a Swing-about, swaying, 
and rotating globe. 

St. Leonards-on-Sea. E. MIDDLETON. 


In their reports, it is rather strange such giants of navi¬ 
gation, and close observers, as Captains Cook, Ross, Weddell, 
and others, do not mention having seen the sun at midnight 
during their voyages in the forbidding regions of the ex¬ 
treme south. 

According to some recent hints in the press, such phe¬ 
nomena is stated as having been observed by the British 
Antarctic Expedition, though it is only mentioned by the 
way, without expatiation ; if this is a fact, pianists are quite 
prepared with good evidence against the globular theory 
(see “ Zetetes ” lucid remarks on this point in past numbers 
of The Earth), though they have not the slightest necessity 
to rely on the peculiar movements and appearance of the 


25 3 

heavenly bodies, to prove their case up to the hilt, irrespec¬ 
tive of such phenomena. 

In a notice on the relief ship of the expedition, The Sphere 
of May 30th, 1903, states: “The Morning got away only 
just in time, for on March 3rd she was jammed in newly 
formed ice. On March 5th, at 2 a.m., the nights being dark, 
she was surrounded by seventeen large icebergs and count¬ 
less smaller ones. It was like steering a bicycle through a 
graveyard full of tombstones with your eyes shut.” 

There evidently was not much midnight sun at this time 
as the nights were dark, and, owing to the ice, navigation 
was risky. Whether such a sight as a midnight sun 
was observed on previous dates the account did not state. 
Under any circumstances pianists can with calmness wait for 
verified information on this point, as it is immaterial to their 
position, which must continue to strengthen with further 
reliable investigation. 

Recently, the press has been informing the public “ what 
the Antarctic discoverers have done ; ” whether this is worth 
the expense and lisk involved is a questionable point. 
Zetetic philosophers know one thing such expeditions cannot 
do, with all their undoubted courage and splendid appliances, 
and that is, prove the World a globe. 

Up to the present, the knowledge of the southern regions 
has advanced very little since the days of Captains Cook, 
Ross, and a few others, who had to tackle the work in ill 
equipped vessels, and with very crude appliances ; but when 
trumpets sound, learned (?) societies dispute and clatter, and 
concentrated foods, with all the best apparatus, are provided 
ad. lib., the thinking public expect a more enlightening 
budget of information than some already to hand, as for 
example : “ Poplar, one of the ship s cats after being accident¬ 
ally injured, was thrown overboard twice without the desired 
effect.” “ The Parry mountains not existing, are purely 
mythical;” like the globular theory (italics ours); “Mount 
Erebus was smoking splendidly.” “ We steamed 600 miles 
along the Great Barrier ; ” if this had been continued , they 
should soon have arrived at Enderby Land , and round the 
bottom of a globe (italics ours). “ At 79 deg. 35 min. south 
the captain went up in a balloon, but could not see any 
land.” “ All the dogs died.” “ We wintered 400 miles 
further south than anyone has done up to the present, having 
reached 82 deg. 17 min, south.” “Vince lost his life. 



But many are hopeful, when Capt. Scott comes home, he 
will give the world something worth thinking on ; always 
providing his notes are not allowed to be edited and garbled 
(like Capt. Cook’s) by a D.D. or some other globe-biassed 
individual, in order to square them with their doomed theory. 

If the world be a globe, a carefully logged circumnavi¬ 
gation in the extreme southern regions ought to be a very 
simple, rapid, and not over costly affair; the inner circle of 
the so-called scientific cult know this, and that such a test 
will smash their pet theory, and so bring upon them the 
universal contempt their position deserves. Any unbiassed 
person will at once see there is something radically wrong 
on looking at a school map or paste-board globe, and then 
consider that—on the authority of a southern ship-owner, 
and others—the actual logged distance of the direct westerly 
course from Hobart Town, Tasmania, to Durban, South 
Africa, is quite 9,000 miles along the 45 par. of south lat. 
Think of this ! 

Many consider that the government was quite justified in 
halting, before voting more extra funds for the present 
British Antarctic Expedition, as enough money has already 
been expended to prove the main point , if the business had 
been allowed to be carried out with the right motive, viz. : 
truth seeking. Again, many do not entirely agree with the 
usual relieving business, which so many past Arctic Expedi¬ 
tions resolved themselves into. No one wishes brave men 
to be lost for the sake of a little timely help, but too much 
reliance should not be placed on such methods. To say 
the least of it, it is not business-like for Jim to be rash, and 
rely on being relieved by Bill, and then the latter to rely 
on the assistance of another expedition under Jack. 

brom a National, and right stand-point, all that is really 
necessary at present is an exact logged circumnavigation 
at about 55 0 or 60° South This would at once settle the 
fact, that the world is not a globe ; after which the globe- 
professors could at their own expense and risk, make excur¬ 
sions to these southern regions, to get frozen in, geologize 
or fish through holes in the ice to their hearts’ content ; 
and the people would be well rid of them if they stopped 

The circumnavigation suggested would no doubt be a big 
business; but not so big, fruitless, or costly, as that of being 



frozen-in, and wintering so many miles nearer a non-existent 
spot or point—called the South Pole—than anyone else, 
beside risking health and losing life in the effort. 



Of all persons in the world Zetetics must not form hypo¬ 
theses-, or draw hasty conclusions ; or build up any theories 
on what they observe. They are emphatically seekers while 
others are reasoners. 

The primer of astronomy prepared by the late Richard 
Proctor for the London School Board commences with the 
words : 

“ Astronomy is a science whose facts are based 
upon reasoning 

Never was a truer word written as to what is called “ modern 

Never was a falser statement recorded if it refers to 
any true “ science.” 

Never was a sadder confession made by men who arrogate 
to themselves the title of scientists. 

“ Facts ” are facts, and “ reasoning ” is reasoning. A 
“fact” is a thing done, which no reasoning in the world can 
ever affect or alter. “ Reasoning ” carl be based on a fact ; 
but a “ fact ” can never be based on reasoning. 

Science is the Latin Scientia which means knowledge. 
It is what we know, apart from all reasoning. Hypothesis 
is the opposite of this, and is only zvhat we think. 

Zetetics must be careful to remember these elementary 
truths ; and while they seek out facts, and observe them, 
and collect their data, they must not fall into the mistake 
of “ astronomers ” and substitute their reasoning about these 
facts for the facts themselves. 

Euclid furnishes us with a useful guide as to the obser¬ 
vation of facts, or rather as how we should deal with them 
and reason about them. 

When it cannot be proved that one thing is equal to 
another, it has to be proved that the one cannot be greater, 



and that it cannot be less than the other. Then the con¬ 
clusion is that it must be the same in size. 

So with an observed fact; say the disappearance of ships 
at sea. We must not say that it is caused by the globular 
shape of the earth, because that is only assuming the very 
thing that we are seeking to find out. It must be shown to 
us that such disappearance could not be caused in any other 
way. It has not been so shown, and therefore it proves 
nothing ; and nothing is proved beyond the fact that ships 
do disappear. That is a fact. 

Now we, who are seeking for truth, contend that the dis¬ 
appearance of ships at sea may be cansed by other pheno¬ 
mena. It may be due to the laws of perspective. Or, there 
may be other causes of which we are ignorant. 

One thing is clear, and that is, that such disappearance 
does not prove the rotundity of the earth, because it has 
not been proved that there is no other explanation to be 

Or, take the tides. The fact as to the tides is observed 
by all. But that they are caused by gravitation is not 
proved; unless and until it is proved that nothing else 
could cause them. 

Do not let us be drawn into the snare which besets astro¬ 
nomers. They are tethered by their hypotheses, and can 
never really discover anything, because whatever they ob¬ 
serve it must be explained by their hypotheses. It is a case 
of chose jugee, with them ; but that is contrary to the very 
foundation of real science. 

Or, take Eclipses. We know what we see and nothing 
more. By a careful observation their cycles were known 
ages ago, many centuries before modern astronomy was 
dreamed of. 

We know also, the popular explanation, that eclipses are 
caused by the motions of the earth and its shape ; and 
therefore the conclusion is drawn that the earth is a globe. 
But this is the very thing which we are seeking to prove. 
It is quite true if that be the only explanation that can be 
given. But this is the very point in question. 

Our position is that it has not yet been shown that this 
is the only reasoning that explains the phenomenon. 

We should be just as illogical on our side if we said that 
eclipses must be caused by the revolution of a dark satellite. 


25 7 

That would, of course, cause the phenomenon, therefore we 
say this may be the cause. But, nevertheless, we admit 
that it is not proved. Eclipses do not prove that the earth 
has a dark satellite ; but a dark satellite would cause eclipses ; 
but this is no proof that such a satellite exists, or that 
eclipses are caused by it. 

We are Zetetics, or seekers, and of all people in the world 
it is not for us to base our facts upon reasoning ; but to 
observe our facts and collect our data, drawing no conclusions 
until we have them all. We must neither accept as proof 
from others, or state it as from ourselves that such and such 
must be the explanation of a fact, until all other explanations 
are exhausted and can be ruled out. Then we shall all be 
shut up to the only explanation that is left. 

As Zetetics we cannot be called upon to explain anything, 
we are seekers, and our very position protects us from any 
demand that we shall or must explain any phenomena. 

About the earth we do know many facts. Its motion has 
never yet been proved ! But proofs innumerable, from 
Geodesy to Ballooning, prove that it is so founded and 
established that it cannot be moved. 

But when we “ consider the heavens >’ the case is different. 
There we observe that everything is in motion. We observe 
that there is a great variety in these motions. There is the 
motion of the sun, and the motion of the moon ; the motion 
of the planets. These latter are called asteres planates, or 
wandering stars, because they have a peculiar motion of their 
own. Astronomers speak of “ apparent motion ” and “ real 
motion,” but this is assuming the very thing that has to be 
proved. We say that we believe the “ apparent ” motion 
is the “ real ” motion, and we must believe this until the 
contrary be proved. 

Then there is the motion of Comets ; the motion of the 
fixed stars, rising in the east and setting in the west; others 
never rising and setting but revolving round a central star. 

Do we know all about stellar motion yet ? Have we all 
the data ? Is there nothing more to be learned ? May we 
say we have all the facts and may sit down and reason about 
them ? 

Take for instance the motion of the stars in what is called 
the South Pole. Our grievance is that we cannot get at 
the facts. One writer says that the stars there do not rise 



and set, but that they revolve round a central point, as the 
stars revolve at the North Pole. Others, who are travellers, 
speak of the Southern Cross rising and setting. 

What are the facts ? This is the simple question that we 
as Zetetics, seek to find out. 

The writer once enquired of a friend in the South, and 
begged him to watch the motions of the southern stars. He 
put our letter in the newspaper there, instead of observing 
for himself and for us ; and the following answer was given : 

“ Of course, it cannot rise or set, because the earth is 

a globe, having a southern Pole.” , 

But this is the very thing we were seeking to find out, 
which is thus quietly assumed ! And thus we are at present 
shut up to and shut out from that which we are seeking to 
find out. 

Now, suppose, it shall be clearly shown that the stars in 
the extreme south do have a different motion, and do revolve 
round a common centre, as in the North. That would not 
prove either that the earth is a globe, or that it moves. It 
would only prove that certain stars have that peculiar motion, 
different from other stars. It would not prove anything as 
to the shape of the earth, unless and until it should be also 
shown that the stellar motion in question could not arise 
from any other cause. 

This, of course, could not be shown. 

We are anxious in this article to warn Zetetics not to fall 
into the snare of astronomers, and be so ready to come 
forward with their explanations. It is not for us to explain 
but to seek. 

Our opponents are only too eager to get us to give our 
explanations of the phenomena, in order that they may deal 
with ours as easily as we deal with and expose the falsity 
of theirs. 

Do not let us come down from our high platform. 

Do not let us leave our impregnable position. Do not 
let us take off our strong armour and lay ourselves open to 
certain defeat. 

Let us be content to examine their observations, and 
expose their false reasonings, while we continue our special 
work and seek after the truth. 






The Creator and Maker of the Earth, &c.—Whom ? Of 
the earth,—God : Gen. i. 9> 10 > ^ sa< _ x ^ v - 12 > cxv " 

Of the sun and moon,—God : Gen. i. 16 . , 

As the potter knoweth what shape he mouldeth his clay, 
so knoweth God, what shape He maketh the earth. 


Its Shape is: ‘circle’— Isa. xl. 22 ; ‘ ends '—Isa. xl. 28, 
xli. 1; xlii. 10, Job xxviii. 24, xxxviii. 13 . Deut. xm. 17 . 

Ps. x’lviii. 10, lxix. 13 , cxxxv. 7, Zech. ix. 1 3 f‘four corners 
— Isa. xiii. 12, Ezek. vii. 2, Rev. vii. 1 ; ‘ spread forth the 
eart h '—Ps. cxxxvi. 6 ; ‘ stretched out the heavens as a cur¬ 
tain (Ps. civ. 3 ) and spreadeth them out as a tent — Isa. x . 

22 ■ ‘the heavens and stretched them forth,...spread abroad 
the’earth '—Isa. xlii. 5. xliv. 24, Ps. civ. 2, Jer. h. 15 . 

A globe, ball, or sphere has NO 1 ends, being all roun 
alike ■ nor ‘ corners,’ only quarters without corners ; neither 
can it be spread out. Nor « the heavens which are above 
the earth,’— Ps. ciii. ; ‘ heaven,...the earth beneath, Ex. I 

xx. 4 • be stretched out as a curtain, or spread out like a 
tent. ’ Having an ‘ end,'—Ps . xix. 6 ; Isa. xm. 5 . If the 
earth was either a globe, ball, or sphere, the heavens would I 

surround it with no end, instead of being stretched or spreac 

above it with end. A H W EST. 

Owins; to vaiious causes many interesting items, including 
letters, accounts of meetings, lectures, &c., are unavoida y 
held over, and will be dealt with in our next issue. 

The three questions submitted by Mr. H. Lock, and whic 
the Ed. would have particularly wished to answered, will 
also be replied to in our next number. | 


26 o 



I have received a June copy of Past and Future , edited 
by Mr. J. B. Dimbleby. In it the editor has a reply to my 
article in the June issue of The Earth, headed “ The Rotation 
of the Earth, and How to Observe It.” 

Mr. Dimbleby refers to The Earth as “a monthly in sup¬ 
port of a flat and motionless earth.” He says that he has 
no wish “ to engage in controversy with a class of persons 
who love the Word of God.” I can say that I reciprocate 
the kindly feeling intimated in this remark ; but I would 
remind Mr. Dimbleby again, as I have said before, that my 
motto is “ Principles not men.” I have no feeling against 
Mr. Dimbleby personally ; nor have I any personal feeling 
against any man, whether it be the Pope of Rome, Mr. Pigott 
Brigham Young, or Dr. Teed (Koresh), because I differ from 
their religious beliefs—mere individual men, I judge not, 
nor condemn in my mind—I dare not do so. But doctrines 
false, and practices absurd—these I must not only condemn, 
but, with every force I can summon to my-aid, I must fight 
against them, and strive to crush them. 

We think that Mr. Dimbleby is unwittingly doing the 
Bible considerable damage in the minds of men with regard 
to Cosmogony. But I repeat again, that my contention is 
against his errors and inconsistency as a writer on Bible 
subjects, and not against him personally. 

In answering my article which appeared in The Earth we 
should have thought Mr. Dimbleby would have given his 
readers more proof of supposed motions. I offered him space 
in The Earth if he could give me one good proof of the 
earth’s axial or orbital motion. He has not accepted that 
offer. Dare he make me a similar offer, to publish in his 
paper an argument against the earth’s supposed motions ? 
I shall see. 

We have admitted matter in The Earth from his supporters, 
would he admit in Past and Future matter from myself and 
my supporters ? If his position be true, and unimpeachable, 
he should not be afraid of it being discussed fairly and 
openly. Because if he is right he could show it ; and if I 
and my supporters are right in believing in a motionless 
earth, then he is doing a grievous wrong in supporting the 


editor of The Clarion, and infidel science as taught in the 
globular theory of the earth. 

Mr.Dimbleby owns that the astronomy of the Chronological 
Observatory cannot easily disprove my position, and that of 
all Zetetics, viz. : that God “ hath founded the earth on its 
bases that it cannot be removed; ” and therefore it is 
motionless. But, nevertheless, Mr. Dimbleby thinks that 
the “ British Chronological Association can do it on the 
question of time.” 

But we fail to see what the question of time has to do 
with the shape of the earth, and the motions of the sun, 
moon, and planets. These motions are the same whatever 
theory we hold about the shape of the earth. Mr. Dimbleby 
should know this. In fact he does know it, for he admitted 
as much in the year 1897 A.D. (5895^ A.M.), when he pub¬ 
lished the ninth edition of his book of Past Time. On page 
1 29 of this book he says that to whatever system of astronom 
is believed it .would not affect the question on Chronology. 

Under the'head, Three Systems of Astronomy, he says : 

“ Although there are three svstems, none of them affect astronomical 
Chronology, which can be claimed hy each. The first is held at the ob¬ 
servatories, namely, that the earth is spherical, rotating on an axis, and 
travelling round a statiovaty sun in 36f>t days.” 

He then refers to the Zetetic system, and to a third sys¬ 
tem which teaches that the earth is a globe immovable with 
the sun revolving around it. Now if these three systems of 
astronomy make no difference as to the question of Chron¬ 
ology, why does Mr. Dimbleby try to persuade his readers 
that his chronology disproves a motionless earth ? He says : 

“ The disproval of a motionless earth cannot be so well determined by the 
old system of astronomy at the Greenwich observatory, built upon a sub¬ 
sidiary Christian era. It is a natural and scientific system taught by the 
British Chronological and Astronomical Association, and which is the same 
astronomy as thit of the ancient Egyptians and Babylonians, that lucidly 
settles the controversy by proving that the earth both rotates and has an 
annual motion round the sun. Unfortunately the old (?) school of Astro¬ 
nomy invented at the Greenwich Observatory has had no knowledge of the 
astronomical period of 649 years used by the ancients.” 

If Mr. Dimbleby has any evidence that “ lucidly settles ” 
this controversy we should be glad if he would produce it. 
He says that, “there are two zodiacs, one annually made by 



the earth travelling round the ecliptic of 360°, and the other, 
a large one made by the apparent motion of the sun on a 
circle of 648 years.” This is a novel and interesting way 
of trying to prove the motion of the earth, to say nothing 
of the “ apparent motion of the sun,” which of course he 
thinks is not real, making a second Zodiac ! If our readers, 
or his readers can see herein a proof of the earth’s motions 
they must have keener perception than we have. 

However, we give them the proofs for what they are worth. 

The editor of Past and Future further says, that the 
Egyptians believed in a “ revolving earth,” as they called 
it ; but he has not quoted any Egyptian writer giving this 
as his belief. We doubt if he can do so. But even if he 
can, surely merely “belief” is not evidence of fact ? But 
Mr. Dimbleby says we have “ strong evidence of this by the 
way in which every 30 years they (the Egyptians) celebrated 
by a festival the entering of the earth into another of the 
twelve signs of the Zodiac.’’ 

And, he adds : “ these astronomical festivals will not coin¬ 
cide with the apparent solar zodiac in which the sun seems 
to move.” (Italics ours). 

This seems a strange way of proving the earth’s motions ! 

We should like very much to attend any festival where we 
might see the “ entrance of the earth into another of the 
twelve signs,” whether of the “ ecliptic zodiac ” or that other 
solar one which he says is only “ apparent.’’ However “ ap¬ 
parent ” it may be to Mr. Dimbleby he has failed to make 
this proof apparent to us. 

Mr. Dimbleby makes this further assertion respecting the 
Egyptians : 

“Their numerous records of this motion of the earth round the ecliptic 
is a most conclusive proof that they believed in a moving earth, and the fact 
that these records are always numerically correct from the date of Creation 
is evidence that the early Egyptians obtained their knowledge from the Adamic 
line of patriarchs.' 5 

Now we challenge Mr. Dimbleby to give us from Egyptian 
heraldry one instance of a “ record ” of the earth’s motion 
round the Ecliptic. I do not think he can give us one ; and 
that, moreover, he has drawn on some fancy for what he 
thinks is evidence. He first assumes the question at issue 
and then gives it as “ proof” of what he wants us to believe. 



But we do not believe it. And even if the Egyptians 
“ believed ” in a moving earth, I should still want rehab e 
proof of the motion. That is, we should want proofs that 
are not opposed to the evidence of our senses, nor in discord 

with the Bible. , f 

But Mr. Dimbleby has not even given his readers prooi 
of the “ belief” of the Egyptians, much less of the motions 
of the earth, as is proved by the system of the great Ptolemy. 
The Ptolemaic system taught that the earth was not only 
motionless but the centre of the universe, the sun and stars 
revolving around it. So that we challenge Mr. Dimbieby s 
assertions on every point. Moreover if he wodd take it 
kindly, as it is kindly meant, we should advise him to take 
up some book on logic, and study it well ; he \vould then be 
likely not only to keep the premise of his proofs more 
clear from the petitio principii , which now so frequent y 
vitiates his arguments, but also save himself f rom spendiing 
the rest of his valuable life in building upon a _ sandy and 
false basis of pagan Scripture contradicting origin. 

The globular theory undoubtedly is a cleverly constructed 
platform for showing off mathematical calculations, but if we 
value the truth we shall gladly make any and every sacufice 
for its sake. 


By E. H. RICHES, LL.D., F.R.A.S., _ 

Member of the " London- Mathematical Society , 
late Cantab , etc. 

(continued from p. 223.) 

We will now pass on to the consideration of the well- 
known illustration in support of the rotundity of the 
nam ely • observing a ship sailing directly towards the horizon. 
As has been stated, at a certain distance from the observei, 
the hull of the ship will gradually disappear horn his view 
and when that is quite out of sight, it will be observed that 
the masts will also disappear m a similar way. 


Now, it will readily be perceived that the mode of dis¬ 
appearance would happen in the event of the surface, on 
which the ship is sailing, being an arc—in fact, in no other 
way could the ship disappear; but by a short consideration 
of the case, we may be led to question whether or not this 
same mode of disappearance of the ship might occur if the 
surface on which the ship is sailing be a PLANE, 

The following fact has been noted, namely : that a ship 
lost to view under the circumstances just mentioned, has 
been seen after its disappearance by the observer using a 
powerful telescope. The whole of the ship has thus been 
brought back to sight. Might one argue from this, that 
the ship was lost to sight because it was so far advanced along 
the convex arc that the surface of the water came between 
the ship and the sight of the observer ? Those who main¬ 
tain that this experiment is a proof of the rotundity of the 
earth, would tell us so. If it is, what is to be said to the 
ship’s being brought back to view again by means of the 
telescope ? 

Optics tell us that any object travelling from us (as the 
ship in the above instance) would disappear in a similar 
way, in the case of the surface between us and the object 
being a plane. If an observer standing at the end of a long 
street observe the rows of gas lamps on either side, and their 
apparent diminution of size as the distance increases, he will 
see that those nearly lost to view in the extreme distance 
will present to him nothing but their tops, the lower portions 
being quite lost to view. If a train be watched closely as 
it travels from an observer, the wheels and lower parts of the 
carriages will disappear before the top of the train will do 

Briefly, then, the following fact may be stated, namely : 
that the lower part of any object travelling away toward’s 
the observer’s horizon, will disappear first, and the top part 
will be last in view. This holds good on water as on land, 
and so must in necessity hold in the case of a ship at sea 
hastening towards the horizon, which does appear in the 
exact manner described. A question thus suggests itself, 
namely : Is the mode of disappearance of the ship at the 
horizon any proof of the rotundity of the earth ? 

Mr. Glaisher, whose name is so well in connection with 
balloon ascents for purposes of scientific discovery, has 



affirmed that even at the greatest distance from the earth to 
which he has gone, he always found that “the horizon 
appeared on a level with the car ; ” and in the London Journal 
of July, 1857, the following interesting reference to balloon 
ascents may be found: “The chief peculiarity of the view 
from a balloon at a considerable elevation, was the altitude 
of the horizon, which remained practically on a level with 
the elevation of two miles, causing the surface of the earth 
to appear concave instead of convex , and to recede during 
the rapid ascent, whilst the horizon and the balloon seemed 
to be stationary.” 

This curious fact of the concave appearance of the surface 
of the earth, as seen from a balloon at an altitude of two 
miles, is worthy of note, and appears to be difficult of sol¬ 
ution when considered by one unacquainted with optics. How 
is it that a sphere or globe of large dimensions when viewed 
in space at a distance of two miles or less, loses its natural 
form and assumes that of a concave surface to the eye of 
the observer ? It seems natural to suppose that the earth 
being of the form of a globe, its surface as viewed from a 
balloon would appear just the opposite (namely : convex) 
from what has been affirmed unanimously by all aeronauts. 
Philosophy tells us, that the surface of the earth (land and 
water) is the opposite to a plane , namely : that it is convex ; 
still it can be seen that it is possible to bring forward argu¬ 
ments in favour of the earth’s surface being a plane, and 
also that those arguments generally supposed to support 
the theory of the earth’s rotundity are really no arguments 
in its favour but decidedly against it. It is not my intention 
to consider any more of the experiments that have been 
made than I have, but will simply leave my brief and some¬ 
what rough explanatory statements of the same to the 
consideration of the reader. 

In the face of modern philosophy it would be a bold thing 
for one to say that the theory of Newton’s disciples is a 
mistake, and to affirm that there is enough proof to show 
that the surface of the earth is a plane , and that there is no 
proof whatever of its being a globe. If one were bold 
enough to advance such a theory men would smile, and the 
chances are that the man who did advance the same would 
be ridiculed. Only those who have studied astronomy can 
tell into what a vast sea of hazy doubt one is often plunged ; 



and results so bewildering are arrived at, that one is almost 
led to doubt any known theory whatever. 

On page 392, volume ii. of Extracts from the Works of 
/ohn Wesley, may be found the following: “The more I 
con^der them, the more I doubt of all systems of astronomy. 
1 doubt whether we can with certainty know either the dis¬ 
tance or magnitude of any star in the firmament; else why 
do astronomers so immensely differ, even with regard to 
the distance of the sun from the earth ? some affirming it 
to be only 3, and others 90 millions of miles.” 

This extract is of some interest, in that Wesley was well 
up in the astronomy of his day ; and methinks he but re¬ 
echoes the sentiments of many even of the present day. 

e word ‘ speculation ” might fairly be applied to many 
portions of the Newtonian philosophy. To use plain lan¬ 
guage, it may be said that, after all, the earth may not be 
a globe. 

ithcUdl m and at Jn m a, r en 1 ui ? es Meeting this Magazine and the Inching it 
EAMR lnd « U r f u ‘^o»sand matter f°r insertion, should be addressed to 
ts.A.M.B., II, Gloucester Road, Kingston Hill. 


The Ed. does not necessarily endorse statements made under the headings of “ The 
Jsaelh s Observatory, Letters, etc., unless signed Ed. The Earth. 

belutiW L0 ” d0n NeWSo{ J une 2 7th July 4th, there are some 

Shackleton with Ar* •"!■ conl l e< ' tlon wlth the Discovery expedition by Lieut. 
S whh descrl P tlon u °f the southern regions, showing the course of the 

Tthe AnlarcHc tT P °" th \ g '° bular system-adapted from Ross' Quadrant 
the maD is mkleJi. aCC ° Unt be \ rS °" t al1 that Zetetics hav « advanced, but 
ine to the man in I g; V j Z ‘ tb f 4tb beb -> 1902, the Discovery was, accord- 
g to the map in longitude 165 West, and on the 9th the vessel had sailed 

X S d Sn n did n t ° ng t Ude / 67 EaSt ’ (What ladtude th Vin ?And Tn 
-Ed dld ‘ ravel ln g e tting from long. 165 W to long. 167 E. ? 

least 72 miles °J 28 wh ' Ch ° n the Plane Earth would be at the 

2St Jr S r S t ° r 2 J 00 ° mi!es ’ which wouid be impossible for a 
there^vould^° n the ocean ’ But if this earth is a S Iobe 
Plfshed mtferlv • n \ d , es to a de S ree ’ or 500 mi '“, Which could be accout¬ 
rin' Ed | ‘ mp ° SSlble *° travel 500 miles in icebound seas, such as they 




A Lecture delivered at the Congress Hall, Clapton, by Laty E. A. M. Blount. 

Reported by Jonathan Nicholson, Editor of Vitality and Health Culture. 

The Congress Hall is a magnificent building seating some 6,000 people ; on 
rare occasions it is filled, such as a visit from General Booth or some of the 
leading lights ©f the Salvfflion Army. To see it so well attended on a week- 
night, as it was upon the visit of Lady Blount, means that the lecturer or her 
subject had created a sensation, for usually Salvationists are exceptionally con¬ 
servative upon unknown matters. 

The meeting had been well boomed by Major Orsborn and his able staff of 
officers,so that it was most gratifying to them to see so appreciative an audience. 
The opening song, accompanied by the Congress Hall Brass Band, breathed 
out hopes of salvation to every soul in the building ; this was followed by 
prayer, and then her ladyship was Introduced (receiving a magnificent reception). 

To Salvationists the globosity contravention is gibberish. They have been 
taught at school tl e earth is a globe, and have never given it a thought other¬ 
wise than that it is a flying mass, so that the lecture given quite knocked them 
off their legs, opening a new line of thought. 

Her ladyship took in the situation at a glance ; she saw she had a mixed 
audience. There rubbing shouldeis, were the most up-to-date men and women 
of the day, anjxious to get all they could from the subject, while the honest 
brown faceg of the daily toiler listened with rapt attention and took it all in. 

The subject is an interesting one to those who think. The Salvationist is 
taught the need of thinking for himself and not to depend upon the brains of 
others. Perhaps this had something to do with her ladyship’s magnetic influence 
upon the whole of that vast assembly; any way she was a success in every 
sense of the word. 

Lady Blount speaking to the following effect, said : 

The magnificence of the Works of God contained in the whole universe afford 
inexhaustible pleasure and profit when the surveyor is in harmony wkh, and 
controlled by, a prayerful desire for truth and knowledge. 

But our knowledge of God’s CreativeWorks should be in harmony with God’s 
own account of His Creation as given in His Inspired Word. 

Misrepresentation of God’s Creative Works, and the facts of Nature having 
been ignored by so-called “ scientists,’’(her true principles attacked and derided,) 
has. been the cause of thousands of men and women, possessed of more than 
ordinary mental capacities giving up the teaching of the Holy Scriptures and 
thus losing the great benefit which they might have derived from the teaching 
of God’s revealed Word. 

Science-mongers have, in order to give their Scripture-contradicting science a 
footing, been compelled to deny the Word of the living God, and this not only 
verbally, but they have done so frequently in their written works ! 

Prayerful study of Nature, and all visible phenomena, guided by Holy Writ 
will of necessity raise the human mind to thoughts of the Creator,and increasing 
faith in Him and in His Word will lead to a higher condition “as seeing 
Him who is visible.” 

The lecturer dwelt long upon the absurdity of the whirling globe theory, and 
showed that not only is it opposed to the teaching of the Bible but that it 
unreasonably contradicts the facts of Nature. For instance, the “ miraculous ” 
power of gravitation is simply a fabulous conception, invented to pull all and 
everything to a supposed centre by a force supposed to be equal to the quantity 
of matter in a body, without any known cause : 

This power of such fame, 

“Gravitation” by name, 

Pounced down on the atoms whilst strewing ; 

But further back gaze 
O’er eternity’s maze, 

What before was good gravity doiwg. 



Pagan, scripture-contradicting “science” is flooding the world, and we are 
derided for not accepting the imaginary gravity device upon the bare word aral 
assumption of such men as Sir Isaac Newton, and crediting him with knowing 
more than the Creator Himself. 

True science, founded upon fact and reason, of course exists, but much now 
presented to us as true science, including the Nebula hypothesis, is simply that 
which is described in the Scriptures as, “ science falsely so-called.” 

After giving the history, nature, and origin of the globe theory ; and several 
proofs that water is level, and speaking of the (so-called) “centrifugal ” motion 
of the earth,” which according to astronomers makes the earth tty away from 
the sun, and the “ centripetal ” or centre seeking , which they say “ tends towards 
the sun, the lecturer pointed out that these opposing forces would tend to nulli¬ 
fy each other. 

Lady Blount gave a number of practical proofs against the veracity of the 
globular theory. She stated that from a vessel midway between Kingston Pier 
and Holyhead, which are 60 miles apart, lighthouses can be seen which would 
be many feet below the horizon, after deducting the height of the lighthouses 
and the height of the observer, and therefore could not be seen if the earth 
was a globe. Also, the sun rising and setting at sea always shows a straight 
line, as if a piece was cut oft' the bottom of it, but if the earth were a globe the 
line would be somewhat of a crescent shape—“ This is a good proof that the 
earth is not a globe,” said the lecturer, because it is the same when the sun’s 
diameter is magnified with a powerful telescope. This caused an objector, at a 
recent meeting, who said the curvature was too small to be seen with the naked 
eye, to collapse, as it is patent to all that a good telescope would magnify the 
curvature and thus make it visible if it were there. 

Lack of space prevents giving in detail all that was brought forward regarding 
ships at sea, the laws of perspective, mathematics, etc. But regarding the latter 
the lecturer said : “Mathematics are of excellent use when employed about 
their proper objects, under the control of a logical mind ; but they were never 
intended to rob those of highest mental capacities of common sense, for the 
purpose of filling the less gifted and uncultured mind with wonder.” 

But many learned men seem to be deficient in true logic, as was Professor 
Yule Oldham who stated that there was a six feet rise in three miles from the 
place where you stand. A six feet rise on a hall is a fallacy ! It should be a 
six feet fall. 

Pythagoras had been the first to introduoe the sea and earth globe theory 
into Europe, after a long sojourn in the East, and the general introduction of 
these false ideas had been the cause of the rise of modern scepticism and infidel¬ 
ity. Men, such as the Ed. of The Clarion , now eyist who through the influence 
of modern science (which they regard as being infallible) dare to make such 
assertions as the following :—“ I will show that the ancient Jewish God, Jeho¬ 
vah, was utterly incapable of conceiving a scheme of creation so magnificent as 
scienc# has revealed. For it is to human labour, and to human science, and 
not to divine inspiration that we are indebted to the expansion and elevation of 
our ideas of the universe, and its Creator.”—Ed. of The Clarion. 

So the sceptic thinks that the universe of the Bible and its Creator are far too 
inferior for him, therefore he invents, as he thinks, a greater universe, and so 
makes himself a greater Creator. 

But I will quote no more of such blasphemy. Let us (tray that the one who 
penned it may yet learn that—- 

“ Man shall not live alone by bread. 
But by each word that God has said.” 


THE EARTH , No.s 35 & 36. 

P. 230-231 : V. A. Wraight didn’t spin his bowl long enough. P. 236, para. 
7: “ Zenith stars would set in the plane of the observer’s position.” Rather 
obscure ; but anyhow, one has only to experiment with a globe and candle to 
find that the what the stars would do on the globular theory is just what they 
do do. 

Reply to above.—We think that you fail to see clearly on this subject, because 
some of our leading Zetetics have proved most satisfactorily that if a globe re¬ 
volving in front of stars, sun, and moon, was a fact, they would undoubtedly 
rise and set in the plane of the observer. They could not do otherwise. 

P. 238 : “ All objects below the eye-line vanish into the eye-line.” No, they 
don’t. Stand on a cliff top when the eye-line is level with the mast-head of a 
ship. As the ship recedes the masts do not vanish first. I have pointed this 
out about ten times ; no Zetetic has answered it yet. 

Reply.—Again it seems you are in a fog. The mast-head is on a level with 
the eye you say. Then how can it vanish into the eye-line ? Will you kindly 
give me the elevation of your eye, and that of the object, or objects, you look 
at above sea level ? 

Explain how the phases of the moon are accounted for on the plane-earth 
theory ; and also about the eclipses. 

Reply.—No man living can give a positive explanation of the cause of the 
phases and eclipses of the moon ; but we suggest the following. The moon’s 
phases may be caused by the illuminated part of the moon being turned away 
from us and towards the sun, so that we cannot see the whole of the illuminated 
face of the moon. When we only see half the moon’s illuminated face we say it 
is the first quarter, referring principally to the quarters of the month. Eclipses 
may be caused by some semi-transparant dark body passing between us and the 
moon. But what that body is, whether gaseous or solid no one can tell. It is 
certainly not the shadow of the earth, as popularly supposed. As the lights are 
above the earth(Vthe earth’s shadow (if it has one) cannot possibly fall upwards. 

I have found The Earth very interesting and instructive hitherto but it is be¬ 
coming more so. Thanking you much for your last communication, and its 
valued contents. A. W. 

All your writings interest me immensely, and I feel so refreshed after reading 

I was present at your large meeting in the park, and I regarded it as a won¬ 
derful sight to behold thousands of men so thrillingly interested with the truth 
as to stand for near two hours without a sign of weariness. You also held the 
deep attention of your audience, of about 1,000 at the Congress Hall. They 
seemed spell-hbuitd ! 




We haVC much P lea ™,e in recommending the above work. 

c ® ntains t he three thousand words, and idioms 
\hich are most used in ordinary conversation • sufficient to 

peSr a rSs t0 h a J k p ren ? a " yOUrIife 5 no fossiI Philological 
peculiarities, but Erench as it is actually spoken in France 

G a mm a, lln d„ | ies each group of examples, and we think 

a cleverly condensed method of teachinfr the French 


The Author of French in Three Months also go es Lessons 
in Conversational French to adults, at 




Fnends of the Ed^ of this Magazine can testify to his ability 
and agreeable way of teaching. 

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co., 


22, Budge Row, Cannon Street, 


Price of Appliances £1 is., n &, & $ & 

Instalments may be arranged. 


Vol. Ill, Nos. 39 & 40. 



By Lady Blount. 

(continued from p. 245). 


“The Sun and Moon Stood Still.”— Hab. iii. II. 

The sun’s motion is not only a fact according to the Holy 
Scriptures, but also a fact which is self-evident to our senses 
without any artificial aid. Tully says that the sun is called 
Sol because it is the “ only ” heavenly body of that magni¬ 
tude, and because when it rises it puts out all the other orbs 
and “ only ” appears itself. Both common sense and ex¬ 
perience verify this statement, which is in accord with the 
first chapters of Genesis, wherein we read : “ God made two 
great lights, the greater light to rule the day.’’ 

It seems an undeniable fact that the midnight sun is seen 
in the southern hemisphere (so-called), for we have it on no 
mean authority, viz. : the Perth, W.A., Astronomer Royal, 
the testimony of the crew of the Belgica, and the whole 
exploring party on board the Discovery , that it is thus seen 
in the South as it is in the North. 

Mr. Ernest Cook states in the last letter which I received 
from him, that, “the midnight sun ought to be seen in the 

middle of summer (December).at all places south of 

latitude 66| S. As a matter of fact there is no known 
habitable land in the Antarctic regions, so we hear nothing 
about it, but I read only a few days ago an account of the 
exploring vessel, the Discovery , I think it is called, wherein 
it was stated that the ciCw played cards on deck at midnight 
with the sun shining down upon them on Christmas Eve.” 

This corresponds precisely with the accounts which 
we received here in England. In more than one report it 


french in three months t 


IVe have much pleasute in recommending the above work. 

™ e , b ° 0klet con * :a 'ns the three thousand words, and idioms 
ich are most used in ordinary conversation ; sufficient to 
enable you to talk French all your life ; no fossil philological 

Gramm ’^hp 1 38 * is actua!1 y spoken in France 

G ammar underlies each group of examples, and we think 
this a cleverly condensed method of teaching the French 


The Author of French in Three Months also gives Lessons 
in Conversational French to adults, at 




Friends of the Ed of this Magazine can testify to his ability 
and agreeable way of teaching. 

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co., 


22, Budge Row, Cannon Street, 


Price of Appliances £1 Is., £2 2 S , k £3 3s. 

Instalments may be arranged. 



Vol. Ill, Nos. 39 & 40. 



By Lady Blount. 

(continued from p. 245). 


“The Sun and Moon Stood Still.”— Hab. iii. 11. 

The sun’s motion is not only a fact according to the Holy 
Scriptures, but also a fact which is self-evident to our senses 
without any artificial aid. Tully says that the sun is called 
Sol because it is the “ only ” heavenly body of that magni¬ 
tude, and because when it rises it puts out all the other orbs 
and “ only ” appears itself. Both common sense and ex¬ 
perience verify this statement, which is in accord with the 
first chapters of Genesis, wherein we read : “ God made two 
great lights, the greater light to rule the day.’’ 

It seems an undeniable fact that the midnight sun is seen 
in the southern hemisphere (so-called), for we have it on no 
mean authority, viz. : the Perth, W.A., Astronomer Royal, 
the testimony of the crew of the Belgica, and the whole 
exploring party on board the Discovery , that it is thus seen 
in the South as it is in the North. 

Mr. Ernest Cook states in the last letter which I received 
from him, that, “the midnight sun ought to be seen in the 

middle of summer (December).at all places south of 

latitude 66| S. As a matter of fact there is no known 
habitable land in the Antarctic regions, so we hear nothing 
about it, but I read only a few days ago an account of the 
exploring vessel, the Discovery , I think it is called, wherein 
it was stated that the ciCw played cards on deck at midnight 
with the sun shining down upon them on Christmas Eve.’’ 

This corresponds precisely with the accounts which 
we received here in England. In more than one report it 



was stated that at the termination of a long, night of four 
months duration,they had about two minutes’ daylight, then 
aftei twenty-four hours’ night they had a day that lasted ten 
minutes, and after this the days increased in length,becoming 
longer and longer until the sun remained above their horizon 
foi seveial months as it is observed during our Summer at 
the N01 th “ Pole regions. I have also received confirmation 
from the Perth Astronomer Royal that there is a star which 
is practically a south “ polar star,” and that the southern 
constellations revolve round a central point as the stars re¬ 
volve at the North Centre. As to the motions of the' 
southern stars, it has been asserted that they cannot rise or 
set because the earth is a globe.” But this is only as¬ 
sertion. The fact which we learn however is, that “certain 
stai s in the extreme south have a different motion from those 
in the North.” 

By modern scientists it is deemed a legitimate deduction 
to conclude that the belief that the earth is a revolving globe 
moving rapidly in an orbit round the sun, with its axis of 
revolution inclined to the plane of the ecliptic, is verified 
by the fact that its “ poles ” are alternately illuminated by a 
long continued day lasting for a period exceeding one hun¬ 
dred ordinary days and nights. 

But let us examine whether this phenomenon will afford 
any proof in support of the globular theory. In South Sea 
Voyages, by Sir James Clarke Ross, it is stated: “ In lat. 
65° 22 S. long. 172" 42' L., on Jan 4th, at 9 p.m., the sun’s 
altitude was 4 0 . I he setting sun was a very remarkable 
object, being streaked across by five dark horizontal bands 
of neaily equal breadth, and was flattened in a most irreg¬ 
ular form, by the greater refraction of its lower limb, as it 
touched the horizon at ii° 56' 51". Skimming along to the 
eastward, it almost imperceptibly descended until the lower 
limb disappeared exactly 17 minutes and 30 seconds after- 
waids. The difference in the horizontal and vertical diameter 
was found by several measurements to amount to only 5' 21" 
the horizontal being 32' 31", and the vertical diameter 27' 
10, that given in the Nautical Almanac being 32' 34”.” 
At p. 207, vol. 1, it is said: “ In lat. 74 0 S, long.'171° E, on 
Jan. 22nd, 1841, it was the most beautiful night we had seen 
in these latitudes. The sky was perfectly clear and serene. 
At midnight, 12 o’clock, when the sun was skimming along 



the southern horizon, at an altitude of 2 °, the sky overhead 
was remarked to be of a most intense indigo-blue, becoming 
paler in proportion to the distance fron the Zenith.” 

From these quotations it appears that Lieutenant Wilkes 
saw the sun set at a few minutes before 10 o’clock. Captain 
Ross, a few days before, said that the sun did not entirely 
set or disappear until 14 minutes past 12 o’clock—the sun 
remaining above the horizon two hours longer than it did 
to Lieutenant Wilkes a few days later in consequence of 
“ unusual refraction.” It is not stated whether the sun was 
seen in the northern or southern horizon; but as the earth 
is a plane, and the sun’s path is concentric with the northern 
centre, it was skimming along to the eastward, beyond, or 
on the other side of the northern centre. 

The sun rising at E (the east) would, during the day, 
move from east to west (from E to W) ; but during the night 
it would be seen by the operation of great refraction “ skim¬ 
ming along to the eastward from W to S and E. Captain 
Ross saw this phenomenon, but not Lieut. Wilkes, who 
reports that the sun set a little before 10 and rose about 4 
o’clock. Captain Weddle was in lat. 74“ 15' S. on beb. 
20th, 1822, and he stated that “ the sun was beneath the ho¬ 
rizon for more than six hours.” Captain Ross in his record 
states : “at midnight, in lat. 74 0 S, the altitude being only 
2°, the sun was skimming along the southern horizon.” 

In M. Chaillu’s book, The Land of The Midnight Sun, he 
says that between June 13th and 16th he sailed towards the 
Midnight Sun in a steamer leaving Stockholm for Haparanda, 
the most northern town in Sweden, 65° 5 1 ' N lat., 41 miles 
S of the Arctic Circle as marked on maps. It is in the same 
latitude as the most northerly part of Iceland. 

At the North Centre “the sun is to be seen for six 
months.” These quoted words are followed by the statement 
that the sun is seen at the Arctic Circle for one whole day, 
at the base of the North Cape from May 15th to August 
1st. At the Pole the observer seems to be in the centre of 
a grand spiral movement of the sun, which further south 
takes place north of him. 

The known location of the Midnight Sun is in keeping 
with the statement that the earth and sea together form a 
vast plane—for, water being level is the best proof that the 
earth must be a plane, because if water is level, the land 



about it is level, and this M. Chaillu unconsciously proves 
in his book. 

If the earth were a globe God would not have given us 
the wrong order of Creation in the opening of the Holy 
Decalogue, wherein He distinctly states, that heaven is 
above, the earth beneath, and water under the earth.” 
The laws of Nature (which were created by God) cannot 
be violated, and that it is impossible to lock round a "lobe 
the annexed diagram will clearly illustrate: 

An observer at M can see the sun at midnight above the 
horizon as shown by the dotted lines, that is, looking di- 
lectly over the North Pole (M Q) ; the horizon is a straight 
me tangential to the surface of the assumed globe at the 
point of observation. It must therefore be placed at right 
angles to the dotted line E M ; but we will leave the reader 
to examine for himself the bearing of this case in an un- 
piejudiced attitude. Then it will be clearly shown to be 
such an one, that for the observer at M to see the sun at 
midnight at P, whether it be from north or south of the 
globe, he would have to look downwards and his vision 
pierce through the globe for over 5,000 miles. The sun 
aeing seen there leaves the Newtonian philosopher with “a 
hard nut to crack.” No wonder that Haeckel entitled his 



book : Th& Riddle of the Universe. To get over the diffi¬ 
culties terrific distances have been assumed, and the sun 
has been asserted to be a million times larger than this 
earth, whereas there is nothing to prove that it is more than 
the reasonable diameter—about 30 miles—especially seeing 
that the sun cannot illuminate more than 90 degrees of the 
semi-surface of the earth, representing an arc of 5 > 4 °° 
with a diameter of 1,800 miles. 

It seems evident while we cannot account for what Com¬ 
manders Wilkes, Bison, Sir J. Clark Ross, and other navi¬ 
gators in high southern latitudes saw, namely, from January 
10th to February 19th, that there was night, and also on 
the 2nd, 6th, 7th, 8th, 11th, 12th, 14th, 17th, and 19th of 
February—but no mention being made of the missing 
dates—we have concluded that the sun had been “ up on 
those dates, and that mention would have been made of so 
wonderful a phenomenon. 

1 say that while we cannot account for everything, never¬ 
theless, it is evident that, according to the statements of 
recent navigators and explorers in high southern latitudes, 
similar phenomena, relative to the midnight sun in southern 
latitudes, is annually seen, as witnessed in the North. But 
while the sun can be seen at midnight far South on a Plane 
Earth, on a globe it would be an impossibility, because the 
observer would have to either look round the corner or to 
see through a solid globe. 

It is self-evident that an orb, as the sun evidently is, would 
be more likely to give its light simultaneously in northerly 
and southerly directions over a Plane Earth, than if it were 
a globe ; in fact, the globular theory of the earth is proved 
to be an impossibility through the evidence of the Midnight 
Sun in northern and southern regions. 

We ask : Where and when, and by whom was ever a degiee 
of longitude measured south of the Equator? We think 
that it never has been done. But if it could be done it would 
not settle the question of distance in the South, and the 
true shape of the earth. 

When we speak of distances then we have done with 
“degrees” so far as longitude is concerned. We have no 
evidence of certain facts, special observations, and scientific 
experiments ; therefore, if we use the evidence of 0111 senses 



in harmony with the Revealed Word, which is the Truth, 
we shall prove the truth of the words, that the sun’s “ going 
forth is from the ends of the heaven, and his circuit to the 
end of it.” 

It is a fact that the Midnight Sun at or near the southern 
“ pole ” (in the heavens) is seen at the same time in northern 
regions. Also, I believe that the Midnight Sun at the North 
“Pole” is visible at the same time in New Zealand. But 
it is near mid-day there. Therefore, we know the extent of 
“his circuit” in both the northern and southern heavens. 

The sun is never seen above the horizon on the 21st 
December further north than the Arctic circle, 23^° from 
the northern centre, or 66 \° north of the Equator. This is 
the hardest fact for the Newtonians to face that ever was 
put before them if they would face it fairly, instead of as¬ 
suming to be able only to see the sun as far as New Zealand 
when it is known to be shining over the North Pole (so- 

Now I will repeat another fact, often mentioned, namely, 
that the shape of the heavenly bodies and their motions 
have nothing necessarily to do with the shape of the earth, 
or with the fact that God “ hath founded the earth upon 
her basis that it should not be removed for ever.” 

It seems evident that the sun’s path, in his revolution 
around and above the earth, expands and contracts alter¬ 
nately. The movements in some respects may be compared 
to the mainspring of a watch, though the body of the sun 
moves per se, and when we speak of the northern and south¬ 
ern “ declination,” it is only another form of saying that the 
sun’s path is nearest the polar centres at one period, and 
farthest away from them at another. Whether the sun’s path 
was once very near to the earth’s arctic (or polar) centre is 
not now under consideration, though, en passant, there are 
apparent evidences that the conditions and productions 
found within the tropics once existed in northern regions. 

According to the testimony of different persons, equal 
days and nights occur when the sun is on the Equator, and 
long days and short nights occur at the extremities or when 
the sun is in the tropics. The longest days come in the 
northern parts when the sun is on the tropic of Cancer, and 
the shortest days in these parts when the sun is on the 
tropic of Capricorn, and vice versa for the southern parts. 



2 76 


the Equator. Eq representing the Equator. Let A re¬ 
present the position of the sun from the earth, when in the 
tropic of Cancer. It is placed at a distance from the earth 
about equal to the earth’s semi-diameter. This is more 
than its real distance from the earth by at least a thousand 
miles. But we have placed it further off than we need to 
in order to show the impossibility of the sun’s ever shining 
on the North Pole, so-called. From the point A the centre 
of the sun when on the tropic of Cancer draw a line as a 
tangent to the sphere towards the North Pole, and produce 
it to A. It will be seen that this line does not touch the 
North Pole at all, so that according to the astronomers’ 
theory the sun’s direct rays should never be seen at the 
North Pole, not even when the sun has crossed to north 
declination and reached 23^ N. Much less would the sun’s 
rays reach the North Pole when the sun is on or over the 
Equator at B, as the line B b shows drawn at a tangent. 
This line would touch the globe further from the North than 
the line A a. And of course it is worse still when the sun 
is in the tropic of Capricorn, as may be seen by the line 
C c. 

And the same line of reasoning shows that on the globular 
theory the sun never could shine on the South Pole, much 
less the midnight sun ever be seen there! If readers will 
draw their own diagrams carefully, and make them much 
larger these points will come out more clearly. 

When the sun is over the equator, and the days and 
nights are equal all over the world, the sun could not be 
seen at either of the poles according to the spherical hy¬ 
pothesis ; not even if we place it right away from the earth 
at D. But according to reports the sun can be actually 
seen at these places at the times indicated, therefore these 
facts prove clearly that there is something wrong with the 
globular theory. 

That the sun revolves in a spiral orbit over and round 
the earth, is evident from observation ; but some globularists 
say : “ If the earth were flat we should always see the same 
stars wherever we might be—whether in London or Cape 
Town.” Also: “If the earth were flat the sun would rise 
and set upon all the countries of the world at the same 
time.” But this is not true. 

(to be continued.) 




(continued from p. 250). 

Finally we are gravely assured that these “ five distinct 
conditions ” are mostly lacking in the case of the “ other 
planets ” ; and as to the “ suns ” on the confines or inside, 
the Milky Way, they have no planets “ adapted as we are 
to develope high forms of organic life.” (Italics mine.) 

Zetetics will no doubt generally agree with this, as also 
with the following fact, or figure, given in the same article : 

“ Comparing the stars of the Milky Way to the molecules 
of a gas, must not a certain proportion of these stars con¬ 
tinually escape the attractive powers of their neighbours ? ” 
Quite so. And again: “ Can gravitation maintain its in¬ 
fluence on the confines of a finite universe in the same degree 
as near its centre?” As Zetetics we think that the stars, 
like molecules of gas, not only escape the influence of grav¬ 
itation but even defy its power. We have watched a mole¬ 
cule, or rather a mote of dust, quiety floating in the air and 
sunshine, and defying the combined pull of all the molecules 
in the world ! And this was a long way from the “ confines 
of the universe.” In fact it was close at hand, so that we 
could leisurely watch its little ways as it danced about, or 
balanced itself momentarily in the sunshine, teaching us 
lessons that are deeper and truer than any of the deductions 
of Sir Isaac from the fall of a fanciful apple. 

For we must remember that the “ law” of gravitation is 
not that it acts merely on the bulk of a planet, but that 
every atom of matter in the universe is pulling at every 
other atom in the universe, and that a single atom is there¬ 
fore pulling at all others—millions and billions of them— 
and they, at the same time are all pulling at it. I think 
it was, therefore, excusable in me while watching the above 
“ experiment of the balancing mote ” to shout, “ Bravo, 
little speck ; thou hast beaten Newton’s apple ! Gravitation 
brought that to the ground, but thou dost playfully defy 
it! Bravo! 


2 78 man’s place in the universe. 

What Is Man? 

A “ Development ” or a Creation ? 

In conclusion we ought at least briefly to notice this 
ancient and important question. It is strictly germane to 
the subject yet Mr. W., I find, ignores it as a question, and 
quietly assumes throughout his article the unproved doctrine 
of human “ development,” or evolution. Of course the 
globular theory and the evolution theory go together; they 
are, so to speak, cousins german. Every evolutionist as a 
matter of fact is a globite or globularist; and every globite 
ought in consistency to be a believer in evolution. Some 
evolutionists stop with physical evolution ; but others, more 
consistent, carry the doctrine into the realm of spirit, or 
“ mind ” as well as matter. 

Mr. Wallace seems to be of the latter class, As a theo- 
sophist he evidently believes in the natural immortality of 
the soul or spirit; which he would call the ‘• man.” Whereas 
the Bible, agreeable to the facts of everyday experience, 
everywhere teaches that man, the real material man, though 
in temporary possession of “ spirit ” is mortal by reason of 
sin. At the same it sets before man “the blessed hope ot 
eternal life’ as the gift of God through our Lord Jesus the 
Christ. That splendid reasoner, Paul, clearly sets forth this 
doctrine as the peculiarity of the Gospel of Christ. He 
says that to them who by patient continuance in well doing 
seek for glory, honour, and immortality” God will render, 
or give, Eternal Life (Rom. ii. 7). A man does not “ seek ” 
for that which he thinks he is already in possession of; and 
so the theosophist, with others who may have unconsciously 
imbibed this pagan doctrine, refuse to come to the Christ 
that they may have this eternal Life (John v. 40). 

The theosophist, moreover, not only imagines that his 
individual immortality will reach into the unending future, 
but he also believes that it has come down through millions 
of years from the dim and eternal past. In fact he claims 
that man is a sort of lesser god, that he does not surely die, 
but is slowly progressing through dreary ages, cycles, and 
re-incarnations towards a greater godship. Thus they not 
only deny the Creation as described in the Word of God, 
but thej - dethrone the Creator of the world as revealed 

man’s place in the universe. 


therein ; while they blindly accept the delusive promise, 
Ye shall be as gods knowing both good and evil.” This 
phase of the subject is carefully concealed from the general 
reader, but it comes out near the end of the article under 
review. Mr. W. says that such thinkers as himself “believe 
that we ourselves are the SOLE and sufficient result” of the 
forces of this self evolved universe. What is this but saying 
that men by “ development” are, or may become, the only 
gods in existence. Thus belief in a fictitious universe leads 
men to set fictitious values upon their own individualities. 
Nature knows no such values, as may often be seen by its 
wholesale destruction of life both by flood and by fire ; and 
the Bible, ever faithful to the facts of nature, and our own 
personal experiences, shows that because of Sin, Death at 
present reigns in the world ; and that, at present, the Son of 
God “ only hath immortality” (1 Tim. vi. 16). 

Man’s place in Nature is therefore that of a creature—a 
creature formed out of the dust and liable to return thereto 
(Gen. iii. 19). But the Gospel of the Christ comes with the 
glorious hope of a new Life, a new birth by a Resurrection 
(not a “ re-incarnation ”) from the dead. Compare Dan. 
xii. 2, and John v. 28, 29. And this priceless boon is offered 
to anyone who will honestly obey the reasonable and neces¬ 
sary conditions. “ For God so loved the world (this one 
and only world) that He gave His only begotten Son, that 
whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have 
EVERLASTING LIFE.” —John iii. 16. And whoever honestly 
reads the life record of this God Begotten Son must acknow¬ 
ledge that He is worthy of our faith and trust. 

Thanks be to God for His unspeakable gift. May every 
true Zetetic strive to attain thereto. 


“ Hatfield Villa,” 

Gwendolen Road, Leicester. June, ipoj. 

28 o 



By Rectangle. 

(concluded from p. 217). 

But what about the Turanian languages? Do they show 
any such resemblances to the Semitic ? Do the Negro and 
the Hottentot and the savage of Terra del Fuego make 
good their claim to be reckoned both men and brethren ? 
Here the answer is a still more 


There is a very close connection between the various African 
languages. Dr. Latham says: “That the uniformity of 
languages throughout Africa is greater than it is either in 
Asia or in Europe, is a statement to which I have not the least 
hesitation in committing myself.” Among these languages 
we have to number the chief of them—the ancient Egyptian. 
Now this we are able to inspect in its most ancient forms. 
The inscriptions enable us to trace it for more than 2,000 
years before the Christian era. The result is that the 
Scripture account is most marvellously vindicated in more 
than one particular. The Egyptian presents us with a 
language intermediate between the three families of human 
speech. Latham and Bunsen agree in regarding it as inter¬ 
mediary and have called it “ sub-Semitic.” This means 
that the further we go back the more do the languages of 
the three families approach each other, and the more do 
they show the traces of their common origin. 

Before I pass from this point, let me quote a passage from 
Sir W. Dawson’s Archaia, which will indicate how very fully 
modern researches have disclosed the traces of the original 
unity of the human race. He says (pages 295, 296): 

“ To the north the Indo-European (Aryan or Japhetic) 

area is bounded by 


of semi-barbarous populations, mostly with Mongolian 


features, and speaking languages which have been grouped 
as Turanian. These Turanian languages, on the one 
hand, graduate without perceptible break into the Eskimo 
and American Indian; on the other, according to Muller 
and Latham, they are united, though less distinctly, with 
the Semitic and Japhetic tongues. Another great area 
on the coasts and in the islands of the Pacific is overspread 
by the Malay, which, through the populations of Trans- 
Gangetic India (India beyond the Ganges), connects itself 
with the great Indo-Euiopean line. If we regard physical 
characteristics, manners and customs, and mythologies, as 
well as mere languages, it is much easier thus to link 
together nearly all the populations of the globe. In in¬ 
vestigations of this kind, it is true, the links of connection 
are often delicate and evanescent ; yet they have conveyed 
to the ablest investigators 


that the phenomena are rather those of division of a radi¬ 
cal language than of union of several radically distinct. 

That is to say, that the Bible has clearly stated from the 
beginning what Philology is now dimly feeling to be the 
truth ! Will any “ advanced ” friend tell us how this has 
come to pass if Genesis is not fully inspired ? How has it 
been filled with the light of eternal truth, and not with the 
darkness of the age of Moses or of Ezra ? One more result 
of investigation will complete this testimony. Professor 
Hommel, of Munich, has lately announced that there can 
no longer be any doubt that Egyptian civilization 


This is another tribute paid by science to the truth of Gen¬ 
esis, which has made men heirs for thirty-three centuries 
of the knowledge that the human race dwelt together in its 
early days in the valley of the Euphrates. 

Observers in other fields have come upon indications 
which tell the same story. “ Latham,” says Dawson (Archaia 
p. 296), “ has shown that the languages of men may be 
regarded as arranged in lines of divergence, the extreme 



points of which are Fuego, Tasmania, Easter Island ; and 
that from all these points they converge to a common centre 
of Western Asia, where we find a cluster of the most ancient 
and perfect languages.” In other words, “ science shows 
not only that the race is one, but that its cradle was in 
Western Asia, in the very region in which Genesis has 
placed it. This is not strange to us who believe Genesis to 
be the very Word of God. But to those who believe it to 
be anything but the Word of God these facts are nothing 
short of an insoluble mystery, or 



Leaving out of the question the unthinking multitudes 
who are ever ready to believe whatever “ science ” propounds, 
and to spurn to-day what yesterday they worshipped, be¬ 
cause the great god “ Science ” commands, it must be patent 
to men and women of thought that very much of modern 
so-called science is directly opposed to fact and common- 

Science boldly avers that: — 

1. The earth is a globe, the product of evolution. 

2. Man is the highest species of evolution, from lower 
forms through incalculable periods of time. 

3. The sun and planets are superior to this earth, which 
is as a mere speck compared to the myriad (possibly 
inhabited) worlds around us. 

4. The moon is a reflector, and not a giver of light. 

5. The stars are millions of times larger than the earth. 

6. All life having started by spontaneous generation, there 
is no room for a God in Nature (see Modern Review , 
October, 1880,) either to create or direct its forces. 

On the contrary, the Bible consistently states from the 
first page to the last, that: 

1. The world is a stretched-out structure built on founda¬ 
tions, and the result of Special Divine Creation. 

2. Man is the result of Special Creation and was made 
perfect at one time. 

3. The sun and stars are inferior to this (the only) world, 
which they were created to serve. 



4. The moon is self-luminous—a giver of light. 

5. The stars are small objects. Some of them will at a 
future time fall upon this earth, and it is manifestly 
impossible for bodies millions of times larger than the 
earth to fall upon it. 

6. All life was created by Divine Power and made perfect 
at the start, and that God creates and controls all the 
“forces of nature,” which without His sustaining hand 
would cease to be. 

To the thinking man, an apology for doubting the con¬ 
clusions of modern philosophical science is unnecessary ; 
and when these conclusions can be shown to be devoid of 
truth, it behoves the truth-seeker to abandon them and to 
confine his investigations to channels, in which, with a mind 
perfectly free to be impressed by whatever discovery his re¬ 
searches may lead to, he may find out the matter at issue 
for himself. 

A slavish obedience to the popular thing is unworthy of 
any man ; and if men are to free themselves from the tram¬ 
mels of popular prejudice, it can only be by following a true 
free-thought method as indicated above. 


Their respective Stars and Motions, etc. 

It has been asserted by upholders of the globular theory 
that the earth has been proved to be a rotative and revolving 
globe because the stars in the southern “ hemisphere ” move 
round a south polar star in the same way that those of the 
North revolve round Polaris. 

Therefore, in consequence of the foregoing assertion and 
the mythical conclusions and deductions derived therefrom, 
the Ed. wrote to Mr. Ernest W. Cook, Government Astron¬ 
omer, Perth Observatory, West Australia, relative to celestial 
phenomena, star motions, magnetism, etc. That gentleman 
has kindly replied to many of the queries I put to him. 



He says : “ There is a point in our sky round which all 

stars appear to revolve.The axis of our largest telescope 

is directed precisely to that spot.It is not an absolutely 

fixed spot in the sky.” He goes on to say that the position 
varies from day to day very slightly. This variation is (he 
says) in our accepted theory caused by the attraction of sun, 
moon, and planets. There is not any star in this exact spot; 
in fact the spot itself varies slightly. There is, however, a 
small star called Sigma Octantis, and in reply to my ques¬ 
tion Mr. Cook says : “ The sun and moon always appear to 
revolve round this point the whole year through.” Making 
some allowance for their gradual change in declination, be* 
their motion is more in the form of a spiral. 

I am grateful to our esteemed friend, the noted Perth 
astronomer, for the valuable information he has kindly 
forwarded. For we are assured that no results of solid 
facts and true experiments regarding either northern or 
southern constellations could possibly reveal any proof of 
either the earth’s mobility, or rotundity. In studying the 
laws of the universe the minds of atheistic astronomers are 
handicapped with the belief that because the sun and moon 
and the planets are globular, therefore the earth must 
necessarily be a globe, and they start off with the idea that 
the earth is a heavenly body—quite forgetting, or ignoring, 
the teaching of the Holy Scriptures. The earth is God’s 
footstool, and it is “ founded ” that “ it shall not be removed 
for ever.” 

Heaven is above , the earth beneath , and water under the 
earth ; this is the true order of the universe as set forth in 
the second Commandment. And regarding the heavenly 
bodies, it is written, in the true account of Creation which 
comes from the Creator Himself: “God made two great 
lights , the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light 
to rule the night: He made the stars also. And God set 
them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon 
the earth.” b K 

So far as any man does not believe these God-given state¬ 
ments his mind is warped ; and to say the least he stands 
at a great disadvantage, of which we are assured. 

We are stating a palpable fact when we say that “ the 
man in the street ’ may see that the North Pole star is the 
centre of a number of constellations which move over the 



earth, in a circular direction, and those nearest to it, viz. : 
the Great Bear, etc., are always visible in England during 
the whole of their 24 hours’ revotion. 

Those further away southwards rise NNE, and set SSE ; 
sti'l further south they rise East by North, and set West 
by North. The farthest South visible from England—the 
rising is more to the East and South-East, the setting being 
to the West and South-West. As a matter of fact all the 
stars visible from London rise and set in a way which is 
incompatible with the doctrine of rotundity ; e.g., if we re¬ 
main all night on Hampstead Heath, standing with our backs 
to the North, and note the stars in the zenith of our posi¬ 
tion, we shall see that the Zenith stars will gradually recede 
to the North-West ; the same stars rise towards our position 
from NE, demonstrating that the path of all the stars be¬ 
tween ourselves and the Northern Centre move round the 
North Pole star (“ Polaris”) as a common centre of revolu¬ 

This is just what they must do over a plane such as the 
earth is proved to be by Zetetics. Upon a globe, zenith 
stars would rise, pass over head, and set in the plane of the 
observer’s position. Now if we watch in the same way the 
zenith stars from Sydney, Melbourne (Australia), New Zea¬ 
land, Rio Janeiro, and other places in the South, the same 
phenomenon is observed—and we know (from special ob¬ 
servations made) that the zenith stars rise from the morning 
horizon to the zenith of the observer, and descend to the 
evening horizon—and we are informed that from and within 
the equator, the North Pole star (Polaris) and the constel¬ 
lations Ursa Major, and some others, can be seen from 
every meridian simultaneously. On the other hand : in the 
South, the whole of the remarkable constellation of the 
Southern Cross cannot always be seen even as far north as 
Perth. Yet it appears that all the constellations of the 
South revolve around a southern centre, or pole. But, 
nevertheless, the earth has no such “ pole ” or centre , such 
as is maintained by globularists, and described in the ex¬ 
treme opposite point to N on paste-board globes and maps. 

The Cross, which is to navigators a token of peace, and 
according to its position, indicates the hours of the night, 
is not always visible—nor always seen far above the horizon 
just as the Great Bear is at all times visible upon, and north 



of the Equator. Humboldt states, when he saw it, that 
it was strongly inclined, showing that it was rising in the 
East, and his account leads us to regard it as sharing in the 
general sweep of the stars from east to west in common with 
the whole firmament of stars—but in any case giving evi¬ 
dence that the earth is a plane. 

Mr. Cook states ; “I do not know where the South Magnetic 
Pole is situated. We hope to find this out on the return 
of the Antarctic Expedition.” We shall be interested in 
studying this portion of the recorded results of the Expedi¬ 
tion ; and vie trust that much helpful information will be the 

But the existence of a South Centre in the heavens, com¬ 
monly called a South Pole, around which the sun may turn 
in his appointed course in the heavens, disproves not that 
the earth is a plane, and immoveable. Nor would it disprove 
an extended Southern Circumference beyond which God has 
not yet permitted men to penetrate. 

(to be continued D.V.) 

All communications and enquiries respecting this Magazine and the teaching it 
upholds , and all questions and matter for insertion , should be addressed to 
E.A.M.B //, Gloucester Road, Kingston Hill . 


The Ed. does not necessarily endorse statements made under the headings of ‘ ‘ The 
Earth's Observatory,” Letters , etc., ttnless signed Ed. The Earth. 

The smoke from the forest fires which is overhanging the North Atlantic 
States extends to Washington, and on Friday was observed at sea 600 miles 
away. It has even affected navigation at Baltimore.— Lloyds, June 7. 1903. 

It will be seen from the following paragraphs reprinted from the July number 
of Past and Future, that someone has asked its Editor (Mr. J. B. Dimbleby) 
for a Bible text proving the earth has motion ; and Mr. Dimbleby flounders 
about pitiably trying to prove it. Others can see his illogical arguments, and 
his pitiable floundering, and I pray that he may be led ere long to a knowledge 
of the truth regarding Creation himself. 


“Will you give me a Bible text which bears out your contention that the 
f ij„'i u ScriDture believed aud taught that the earth moves ? 

'"'“There fre severafastronomical facts known to us which are not meniioned 
. ,hide The writers of Holy Scripture do not tell us that the length of 

in the Bible. T . he one i davs • vet they speak of solar years. The 

,he solar year « ^p^&rchs are always solar years, not lunar 

Btuthere are passages of Scripture from which The 

the annual revolution of the earth Gen.^5, yeala . by ^ 

20ih of September is a « a y length from all the other days of the year 

autumnal equinox. On the first day of the year the earth is ^^rrcaUy oppo¬ 
site the centre of her orbit ; but on the: four h day she " aS n “ V e fo urth day the 
the sun which is not the S°of the sidereal 7 and 

earth h^ thnce gamed tl d & nQ revo]uti0il in an S 0 rbit round the sun she 
the tropic.1 da). U the eart h(jut the _ which amounts to nearly 

could not daily make tl g so a p r00 f that the cosmogony of the opening 
four minutes each day. Thi * , of 94- hours and not long periods. 

Chapter of Genesis coated of natur^ dajs“|> 0 » of the g e P ar th are 

c.earfyTaultX first chapter of Genesis, and that the points mentioned are 
scientific, surpassing our English c.vrl year mimll es longer than the 

' t he earth to\he stars! . It is because the earth moves about a degree rn her 
orbit daily that this gain is Moses underst ood all this. The Egypt¬ 
ians amongst^wliom he lived, during 40 yea. behire joing.into 
taugh!them tlris! °It is'the° falling b^h^^of ^dereal^rime^whicli e Produces.the 

fourth quarter of 619 when the earth in 

the east has the sun behind licr. 


To the Editor of The Earth. Universe,” says the Savi- 

Madam,—A statement about an argument founded upon it to 

lian Professor of Galilee is subscribed, is deserving of 

"ericas eon^derarion ; for we know that the statement is made by a keen, 
able and experienced collector of facts whole universe known 

The earth and the sun, are ind. ancient and modern world, 

to man, in the past and present his V_ . twenty f ou r thousand miles 

The earth, ast wei now know the 21st of March, when 

in circumference. Ana at tne vc J.i .nnotfir and is in right ascension, 

the great luminary of light crosses the celestr q > th sand m ;i es in dia- 
vertical to our earth, throughout x s. entire^ “^gh 1 therefore, the 


he must, unlike Dr. Wallace, 


,: 3 S 

be very inaccurate in his observations of natural phenomena in the highest 

I'oi a sunspot of a diametjr of 30,000 kilometers represents nearly 19,000 
geographical miles, and a circumference of 57,000 miles, which, if u were 
scientifically true, would inconceivably bestow upon our earth of 24,000 miles 
in circumference, a permanent solar illumination, during a whole period of 
twenty-four hours, and deprive the earth a ,d man of the alternative divine 
blessings of day and night, summer and winter, and the four seasons of the solar 
year, which since the Creation of the Cosmos, have constantly predominated 
throughout the wide boundaries of the world. 

If the Abbe Moreux will cast aside the Newtonian astronomical hypothesis 
and his scholastic educational curriculum, he may readily discover that the 
earth is infinitely of greater magnitude than the sun, the stars, and the planets, 
which conspicuously adorn and beautify the celestial sphere. 

The nescience o r modern astronomical affirmations can n^ver be harmonized 
with the observed phenomena of the heavens. Therefore our modern astrono¬ 
mers should discard the theoretical conclusions of mathematical calculations, 
and the unreliable results of telescopic observations, and wisely accept the in¬ 
fallible determinations of the mariner’s sextant, which according to the Nauti¬ 
cal Almanac, rightly declares that the diameter of the sun at the earth’s mean 
distance is 32 deg. 2 min. 36 sec., the result of the 33 years’ observations, 1851 
to 1883, at the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, as determined by P ofessor An¬ 
drews. One minute of arc on the sextant represents a nautical mile, rnd, 
therefore, the exact diameter of the sun is only 32 nautical miles , with a circum¬ 
ference of 96 miles. 

What, then, becomes of the Abbe Moieux’ legendary sunspot of 33,000 
kilometres in diameter, which evidently represents a hypothetical diameter of 
19,000, and an illusory circumference of 57,000 geographical miles ? 

Mr. H. II. Turner, the Savilian Professor of Astronomy at Oxford, can now 
have no kind of scientific controversy with Alfred Russell Wallace, on his accur¬ 
ate declaration that the earth is the only place in the visible universe, where 
animal and vegetable organisms can live, move, and have their being. 

Yours very sincerely, 

St. Leonards-on-Sea. Wm. M. DAVIDSON. 



(1) II, .according to your theory, all the countries of the world are upon the 
top surface of a disc-like body, will you explain why they do not get their daylight 
m mull aneously ? Because it appears to me that the sun, from its great height, 
must shine upon the whole of the disc from sunrise to sunset. 

The questioner assumes that the sun is a body much larger than the earth, 
located far away in space. Whereas as a »nalte.i of (act the sun is neither large 
enough nor high enough to shine over all the earth, but only over about half 
of it at once, the atmosphere deflecting the sun’s rays from the earth when they 
fall very obliquely, so that darkness follows in those pans until the sun comes 
round again and is nearer. The sun’s light does not travel in straight lines, 
hut converges we believe, and by the refragibilitv of the whole hulk of its ravs 
it circles the earih. 

The cause of the refraction is attributable to the rays passing through media 
of varying density in the atmosphere. 



(2) Everybody knows that the sun’s direct contact with the earth never ex¬ 
tends beyond the tropics, and also that it rises in the east and sets in the west; 
will you explain your theory of the earth’s motions as a disc, to bear out these 
facts so completely as the old theory does. 

The sun’s direct Zenith never extends beyond the tropics, but it never gets in 
“direct contact with the earth.” While the evidence of our senses is opposed 
to the assumption that we are living on a whirling globe composed of land and 
water, we have also the evidence contained in the Scriptures, wherein we may 
learn, regarding the earth, that God “hath founded it upon the seas, and 
established it upon the floods.”— Ps. xxiv. 2. Also in 2 Pet. iii. 5, it is stated 
that “ by the Word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out 
of the water and in the water.” Therefore, while the earth may have^a fhictu- 
a'ion it cannot move from its location ; it is “ founded upon the seas,” and so 
fir as progression is concerned it is motionless. But the progression of the sun 
is a daily visible reality, its motion being in a spiral orbit, the limit of its circuit 
being within the ice boundary. The sun is never directly above any part of the 
earth north of the tropic of Cancer, nor south of the tropic of Capricorn. The fiist 
pa t of the question is cognized in the statement that there are two small circles 
of a “celestial sphere” (so-called) situated each side of the equator, at a dis¬ 
tance of 23 deg. 23 min., and parallel to its greatest distance N or S : if the 
sun he observed from any latitude a few degrees N of a circle of the tropic of 
Cancer for any period, it will he seen to describe an arc of a circle. “The sun also 
ariscrh, and the sun goelh down, and hasteth to his place where he arose. To 
us the sun rises in the east and sets in the west—the reason being that it is the daily 
path of the sun so far as we in this part of the world are concerned. 

(3) This question has been raised : Can a river run uphill ? Scientific survey 
has alwavs shewn a fall in the bed of a river ftom its source to its estuary. The 
geographical term of “ Watershed ” gees to show that any river or set of rivers 
is conducted to the sea by the natural fall in the land that forms the watershed 
and when it has suited the requirements of man to interfere with a river’s course 
as laid down by nature, they have had to resort to mechanical aid in the shape 
of locks and weirs. Will you give your fullest explanation of the point you 
raise here? . . , , , 

Water cannot run uphill, though appearances occasionally caused hy local 
surroundings might lead to a diflerent deduction. The direction in which 
water naturally flows implies that there is some amount of declination in the 
direction which the water takes ; but this is not a proof of the rotundity of the 
earth, but quite the conlrary. In many instances the slope is almost impercept¬ 
ible ; e.g ., for a thousand miles flows the great Nile toward the sea, and falls 
hut a foot. Again, admitting that water flows to where there is a lower plane, 
vet the rivers are practically level—so level that they disprove a spherical earth. 

To the Editor. — I enclose a cutting from Daily News, June 15, and shall lie 
glad to know how it is possible to have four months night and four months 
sunshine in the south polar regions on a flat earth where the sun ought to set 
and rise every day.—B. O. J. 

A ns .—The fact that water is level proves the earth is flat, and the fact that 
the midnight sun has been seen in southern latitudes proves that it is “possible’ 
for the sun to appear there and give a long day, as it does in the North. Both 
facts must be believed a; all “facts” ought lo be believed. We cannot say 
the sun “ought” to rise and set in any particular way over the cUfle"ent parts 
of the plane earth. 



“ The sun knoweth his going down” according to the Psalmist and it is not 
for us to say that it “ought” to do otherwise than it does. As for the ex¬ 
planation of this phenomenon we must be content to wait for further light upon 
the subject. But whether we can explain the phenomenon or not of the southern 
midnight sun, of one fact we feel quite sure, namely, that water is level, and 
the Bible account of Creation is true, and the earth therefore is a plane. 

ED. of The Earth . 

Why is it the sun is not visible all the night, especially as its light is so much 
greater than the stars ? Airs .—We believe it is not so. It is less. 

A ns. to F. W. C.—Let N S represent the north star, and A where the north 
star was seen ? By whom. It is said the north star cannot he seen beyond the 
Equator. The pages should be given in the ioo Proofs and “ Parallax’s ” 
hook, as this would save time. 

Your diagram seems to be taken from “ Parallax’s” book. It was evidently 
intended to show how day and night occur and recur on a plane earth, not how 
muck daylight could possibly exist in any given place at one and the same time. 

The sun does not radiate with equal force, or nther to equal distance, in every 
direction. It is important to notice this. The sun’s light evidently travels fur¬ 
ther east and west than it does north and south. That is it travels further along 
the great circular course, moving round the earth than it does across. This 
should meet your difficulty. 

Light and heat radiate equally in all directions when the sun is on the outer 
circle as it is on December 21st. It is known that the light gradually diminishes 
until at, or about, 20 degrees from the Northern Centre it shades almost im¬ 
perceptibly into twilight and darkness. If then we take from this position to 
the Arctic circle it describes the whole extent of sun, or daylight, at a given 
moment on the shortest day. On June 21st the sun, by gradually contracting 
its path, has arrived at the inner circle ; then the same length of radius will 
produce the circle which represents the extent of daylight on the longest day. 
On the shortest day the light terminates at the Arctic Circle, leaving all 
beyond in darkness—and, as the sun moves forward, the edge of the circle of 
light continues during the whole of its course to fall short at a certain point ; 
hence, although it is daylight over the rest of the habitable earth some time 
during the 21 hours, the centre, N, is left in continual darkness ; but when, in 
six months afterwards, the sun is on tke inner circle (the tropic of Cancer) the 
light extetids beyond the Arctic Circle, and, as it moves in its course, the centre 
(N) is continually illuminated. 

The motion of the sun is a visible reality, which is entirely verified by the 
Scriptures. And if it be observed a few degrees north of the line called the 
Tropic of Cancer, and for any period before or after the time of touching or 
passing the meridian, it will be seen to describe a circle. 

Mr. C. asks: “Why is it the sun is not visible all the night, espeddly as 
its light is so much greater than the stars?” The latter assertion we doubt, 
nevertheless this is a very fair question ; but it has been answered more than 
once in The Earth Captain Parry and several of his officers when near the 
arctic circle, repeatedly saw, for 21 hours together, the sun describing a circle, 
and Mr. Campbell, United S-ates Minister to Norway, with a party of gentle¬ 
men, went far enough north to see the sun at midnight, and they “slid into 
another dry” without losing sight of the sun for 2t hours. The position of the 

the earth's observatory. 


Tropic of Cancer is 234 degrees N of the ^“aWr.^which js^the Vug. mjdnig J, t 
declination the sun attains on or abo rt o 1 earth were a globe, 

sun is characteristic of the North and th. could not be t iMted aU 

The question might be asked, Ilow is it hat the earthy ^ ? ^ ^ to 

over its surface if the sun is several u . ted lbe eavt h to be a wlurl- 

answer this question the glomlarists has >1 ‘ d m jilions of miles away; 

in ir globe, and the sun to be an immense y - . were large enough, 

but ^ve reply: (D if no of lifht 

its light would diffuse over the whole earthy with an atmosphere, 

and darkness could not exist , (y) - on dually increases downwards to 

of many miles in depth, the density of verdcal, as they enter 

the surface, all the rays of light, ex p. r diffusion by refraction, 

the upper stratum of air being Averted in their co:a »e of diffusion y in 

are bent. But refraction, much like at in algebra « ^ ^J in the con- 

other words, conditions vary, but, suppos=' b - e ‘ tion then refraction may' 
dilions of the atmosphere from two points » r n ’ ind t hat it only exists 

be allowed for upon a mean eomputal on, ng different density 

when the line of sight passes tromone m dm.n ..nU> anotne h poipt 

-so where the same medium differs at the point ol ouservauo 

observed. . , rnmmred with the earth, and that its 

.We tike it that the sun is a small body co™l • ea , [h at one time , conse- 

light cannot reach over more than h. ,j e ; s a difference in 

quently, as the sun moves, so night succeeds •) , of a number of con- 

north and the south. The North Pole star .^th^centre ^ being visible 
stellations which move over the earth within the Equator, and 

in England during their 211star and t[he northern constellations 
it is a notable fact that the North p In the South, however, from 

cm be seen from every m-iidiaa n ‘ r the constellation of the 

the equator neither the so-called ~out . , aneoU sl V front every meridian 

Southern Cross can, we are informed, re . Cooke Government Astron- 

From a letter which I received from three stars of the 

rimer, Perth, W. A., that gentleman . ■, w the southern horizon fora 
Southern Cross never set, the fourth g° ss J l ' , - a never sets .” Of course 

short time each day; but in Adelaide an ‘ from (he South than the two 

the fact that Perth is situated at a greater dis .. ^ uoproach the southern re- 

last named places fully' accounts f<> r • whic ‘h were not visible in more nor- 

Sy^»0^hr»^ion has its limits. 


Bates Road, Preston Park, Brighton. 

We were greatly favoured on August 2^,.^ a wa L ^ndemem,’but 


and those who were privilege! haviim heard anything like it before, 

present were quite unprepared for ne h » have listened for hours 

Others said, it gave them an eye-o ener, ^ t^ud the interest was sustained 

2 Q2 


throughout her instructive discourse which set forth truth according to the 
Scriptures* and disproved theory. 

E. V. MULGRAVE (Minister}. 

My experience is contrary to what 1 was taught to believe, viz : that the earth 
is a globe. As a boy, in Jamaica, I used to ask my parents many questions 
about the earth ; and my mother told me there were several poiuts in Jamaica 
from which Cuba could be seen. Later I proved this to be true. In March, 
1881, I went from Montigo Bay to St. Ann’s Bay; some companions went with 
me up the hills, and the morning being bright and very clear, I saw two small 
sails standing out from shore quite distinctly, about five miles oft'. Another sail 
was also visible, about 80 miles away, which I and my friends made out to be 
a barque leaving Cuba. This we saw with the naked eye. 

One of my companions, a pilot boy, had a small telescope with a range of 
40 miles, but on looking through the glass we could not see these ships ; so the 
owner of the telescope, whose turn it was to watch for ships, stayed until he was 
able to ascertain that the vessels were going to Kingston, Jamaica. 

I would suggest a few causes which prevent anyone seeing a ship a great dis¬ 
tance away, although water is level: 

1. The nature of the atmosphere. 2. The capacity of our visual organs. 


I must thank you for your most interesting lectures. The people were 
charmed with them. I asked one of your hearers (a teacher at a public school) 
what she thought of the lecture ? She said, “ It was good, but most startling.” 
Please to accept our sincerest Christian regards, and we trust that the Lord 
may cause His Face to shine upon vou, and bless you richly. 


Burns House, Church Road, Newick, Sussex. 

Dear Mr. Blatchford,—I am anxiously waiting for the appearance of your 
pjomised refutation of Biblical Inspiration, Up to the present, I presume, you 
have simply been enjoying yourself at a game of shuttlecock with various forms 
of a spurious Christianity (certainly not the Christianity of the Bible)—by the 
way—knocking away some of their old rotten popular theological props—and 
I can tell you, this much to the amusement of some of the onlookers. 

It is indeed laughable to see what a sorry apology and defence these advo¬ 
cates of modern-day (so-called) science, and supporters of philosophical hypo¬ 
thesis have to offer, to see how beautifully they pull down their own fortress. 
And how easily the sandy foundation of their scientific (?) blending of the doc¬ 
trines of such theoretical speculators as Newton, Galileo, Copernicus, Socrates, 
Plato, Pliny, and others, with the doctrines of the Bible can be blown into 
space by the bombs from the enemy’s camp. And well they deserve it for not 
building on the impregnable Rock—THE BIBLE. 

I am, yours faithfully, W. PACKIIAM, 


“THE EARTH,” Nos 41 & 42. 

Church of Christ, West Street, Auckland. July 13th, 1903. 

1 Dear Brother,—Your post card received. I shall he happy to answer any 
questions that are within my power to deal with. It was because I found on 
my recent visit to England that some of my friends denied the existence of a 
southern centre that I had the photo taken for their benefit. I have a more 
recent, and a better plate but no copies are yet printed. 

The statement that “water is level” has been made sponsor for a theory of 
the shape of the earth which contradicts facts of southern positions and distances, 
i.e. y the maps published to give the form of the earth on the plane theory do 
this. The admission of circum-polar stars south carries with it the further fact 
that south is a definite point, and not an infinity of points as represented on 
these maps. The same circum-polar stars visible from my house, I have seen 
from Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, and Capetown. If North and South are 
points,’what are East and West in reference to them ? 

The stars move in the same apparent general direction as with you. Looking 
north, all rise in the east (to the right), and set in the West (to the left). The 
main difference being that in your centre of vision are circum-polar stars, but 
ours sweep in curves from east to west. When you turn and look south you see 
curves, but looking south we see circumpolar stars. Making allowances for the 
difference of latitude and constellations the appearance to us looking south, is 
similar to yours looking north. It is this I think, which has given rise to the 
confusion which I have noticed in allusions to southern appearance. If you 
coil'd imagine all the stars fastened together on their meridians, and meeting 
at the two points, north and south; then an observer beneath them, looking 
north would see them rising to his right hand, but turning to look at the south 
meeting point lie would see them rising to his left hand. Pardon this straining 
of the matter, but I hope it is quite clear to you. 

The sun moves apparently from east to west, and we are within the portion 
of the circle he makes. In the month of January, this year, the setting sun 
shone in at my front door. 

Yes, the length of day increases in summer, and shortens in winter as we go 
south. I copv the following from two almanacs for this year. One is published 
in Auckland, and the other in Christchurch (Middle Island). 

Airkland—Sun rises January 1st, 4.44; sets, 7.23. 

Christchurch— ,, ,, 4.26 ; 7.42. 

Auckland—Sun rises July 1st, 7.18 ; sets, 4.54. 

Christchurch— ,, ,, 7.36 ; ,, 4.30. 

I do not know of any astronomical works published in the south, excepting 
the ordinary reports issued from the Ohserva’ories. T e gist o these usu lly 
appear in the Notices of the R. A.S., or in the Journ 1 of the British A tronumi- 
cal Association. Phillips, of Fleet Street, London, publish a revolving Planis¬ 
phere for the South which is serviceable, and gives a good idea of the appearances 
of the southern heavens. With kind regards, yours sincerely, 


[Copy of Letter to G. A.] J 


^ Hatfield Cottage, Gwendoline Road, Leicester, England 

Dear Brother Aldridge, Sept. 3rd, 1903. 

I have to thank you for vour letter, received on Sunday 

last, August 30lh. 

I do not deny that you have in the south a centre around which the southern 
stars revolve. If some Zetetics deny this it is because they have not yet seen 
the evidence for it. But as you know that southern constellations revolve around 
a so-called south “ pole,” so we know that water everywhere is level, and the 
earth (or land, see Gen. i. 10) therefore a plane. If the earth were a globe, 
according to popular belief, the surface of all canals, rivers, and seas, would 
be convex. 

It is as inconsistent of the globularist to deny that water is level as it would 
be of me to deny your evidence about the southern stars. Both are evidently 
facts, and no fact should he contradicted. The fact that water is level is utterly 
inconsistent with the globular theory, but the motions of the heavenly bodies 
have, speaking generally, nothing to do with the shape of the surface of the 
earth. But you and I are both Christians, and we ought alike to respect the 
Word of the Creator. No part of the Bible can be more undoubtedly the Word 
of God than the Ten Commandments which God spake on Mount Sinai. In 
the second commandment “God said” that 
Heaven is “ above,” 

The eaith “beneath,” 

And the water “under the earth.” 

Can you reconcile this with the whirling globe theory? Where is heaven on 
such a hypothesis ? Shall we as Christians accept the teaching of God’s Word 
respecting his own Creation, or shall we accept the “hypothesis” of “science” 
falsely so-called ? 

If the statements of the Bible respecting the form and order of the universe 
are not reliable, how shall we credit it on other matters? If you t y to shake 
the faith ot Zetetic Christians in the inspired descriptions of God’s Universe 
will you not as a Christian teacher incur a grave responsibility ? 

We Zetetics hold to the plane-earth doctrine because it throws so much light 
on Scripture statements, and strengthens our faith generally in God’s Woid ; 
hut I have publicly debated the question here on the basis of “ science ” alone* 
and I have never yet met a man who could give me one irrefutable proof of the 
earth’s globularitv, or its supposed awful motions. We know that all infidels 
stand on the side of the astronomers, because modern theoretical astronomy 
subverts Bible teaching. Where, then, should all Christians be found ? Let 
us stand together on the side of God’s Word. You in the south could help us 
in the north ; and we in the north may be able to help you in the south. 

\ on say, “ the sun moves apparently from east to west.” Why not believe 
the evidence of your senses, that is, that the sun does move? The Bible says 
the sun moves ; and the same good book says that the earth is established so 
that “ it cannot be moved.” Can you give me a proof that the earth moves as 
astronomers affirm ? I would like to see such a proof. 

There may be, and I think there are, some difficulties still remaining on the 
Zetetic side; but one thing is certain, our teaching does not tend to subvert 
faith in the divine inspiration of the Bible. 

I shall be glad to see your further photos. Please mark which wav the stars 
revolve—your camera being of course pointed to the south. 

With kindest regards, believe me, yours faithfully, 


1‘urther Questions.— 1 : Where does the sun rise to von on the 21st March, 
or 23rd September? Is it due east ? That is to your right hand ? And what 
is your latitude? 2: Where does the sun rise in December, say the 25th? 

How much south of east? Ditto when setting? 3: Where on June 21st? 

I lease also give times of rising and setting. 4 : Does the moon appear to act 
in the same way ? When ? -A.S. 



Nos. 41 & 4 2 - 






“ Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth.’ 

When speaking upon the subject of the Divine Cosmogony, 
revealed to Moses by the Creator and recorded by Moses, 
very frequently have I referred to the above passage of 
Scripture. I have reminded my hearers that there is great 
depth and much food for study in this portion of Holy Writ, 
■J.e., in the whole Book of Job. But even a casual reader 
may clearly perceive, that the lesson which the Lord God 
Jehovah intended to impart to mankind in the one eight- 
worded question, which appears at the head of this article, 
is, that true knowledge and wisdom can alone emanate from 
the Creator Himself. 

Therefore 1 am rejoiced to announce to my readers that 
I have been favoured with an early copy of a new work by 
Dr. Bullinger, on the Book of Job.* Part I., giving its scope, 
as containing the “ oldest lesson in the world ; ”f and Part 
II.. giving a new translation of the whole book. 

It is with the latter that we are principally concerned 
now ; because, for the first time, that wonderful and beau¬ 
tiful book is made intelligible to English readers. 

Both the A. V. and R.V. are, as is well-known, in many 
places quite incoherent—conveying and containing inade¬ 
quate reasonable meaning. Of course, I need hardly add 
that there could be no improvement made to the original. 

’Note.— Published Bv Evre & Spottiswoode. 3.1, Paternoster Row, E.C. 

Price, o,'- cloth ; 7/0 leather (suitable for presents). 

To be obtained also of the Ed. of The Ear/h. 

J Notf..—F or the justification of the translation, where it diflers front the A.V., 
our reader, nuist consult Dr. Bnllinger’s work itself. 


[Copy of Letter to (I. A. [ 

„ Hatfield Cottage, Gwendoline Road, Leicester, England. 

Dear Brother Aldridge, Sept. 3rd, 1903. 

I have to thank von for your letter, received on Sundav 

last, August 30th. 

I do not deny that you have in the south a centre around which the southern 
stars revolve. If some Zetetics deny this it is because they have not yet seen 
the evidence for it. Rut as you know that southern constellations revolve around 
a so-called south “ pole,” so we know that water everywhere is level, and the 
earth (or land, see Gp.n. i. 10) therefore a plane. If the earth were a globe, 
according to popular belief, the surface of all canals, rivers, and seas, would 
be convex. 

It is as inconsistent of the globularist to deny that water is level as it would 
he of me to deny your evidence about the southern stars. Both are evidently 
facts, and no fact should be contradicted. The fact that water is level is utterly 
inconsistent with the globular theory, but the motions of the heavenly bodies 
have, speaking generally, nothing to do with the shape of the surface of the 
earth. But you and I are both Christians, and we ought alike to respect the 
Word of the Creator. No part of the Bible can be more undoubtedly the Word 
of God than the Ten Commandments which God spake on Mount Sinai. In 
the second commandment “God said” that 
Heaven is “above,” 

The eaith “beneath,” 

And the water “under the earth.” 

Can you reconcile this with the whirling globe theory? Where is heaven on 
such a hypothesis ? Shall we as Christians accept the teaching of God’s Word 
respecting his own Creation, or shall we accept the “ hypothesis ” of “science” 
falsely so-called ? 

If the statements of the Bible respecting the form and order of the universe 
are not reliable, how shall we credit it on other matters ? If you t v to shake 
the faith ot Zetetic Christians in the inspired descriptions of God’s Universe 
will you not as a Christian teacher incur a grave responsibility? 

V\e Zetetics hold to the plane-earth doctrine because it throws so much light 
on Scripture statements, and strengthens our faith generally in God’s Woid ; 
but I have publicly debated the question here on the basis of “ science ” alone,' 
and I have never yet met a man who could give me one irrefutable proof of the 
earth’s globularity, or its supposed awful motions. We know that ail infidels 
stand on the side of the astronomers, because modern theoretical astronomy 
subverts Bible teaching. Where, then, should all Christians lie found ? Let 
us stand together on the side of God’s Word. You in the south could help us 
in the north ; and we in the north may he able to help you in the south. 

\ oil say, “ the sun moves apparently from east to west.” Whv not believe 
the evidence of your senses, that is, that the sun does move? The Bible says 
the sun moves ; ami the same good hook says that the earth is established m> 
that “ it cannot be moved.” Can you give me a proof that the earth moves as 
astronomers affirm ? I would like to see such a proof. 

There may he, and I think there are, some difficulties still remaining on the 
Zetetic side ; but one thing is certain, our teaching does not tend to subvert 
faith in the divine inspiration of the Bible. 

1 shall be glad to see your further photos. Please mark which way the stars 
revolve—your camera being of course pointed to the south. 

With kindest regards, believe me, yours faithfully, 


Further Questions.—1 : Where does the sun rise to you on the 21st March, 
or 23rd September ? Is it due east ? That is to your right hand ? And what 
is your latitude ? 2 : Where does the sun rise in December, sav the 25th ? 
IIow much south of east? Ditto when setting? 3: Where on June 21st? 
Please also give times of rising and setting. 4 : Does the moon appear to act 
in the same way? When ?—A.S, 



Nos. 41 & 42. 






“ Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth.’’ 

When speaking upon the subject of the Divine Cosmogony, 
revealed to Moses by the Creator and recorded by Moses, 
very frequently have I referred to the above passage of 
Scripture. I have reminded my hearers that there is great 
depth and much food for study in this portion of Holy Writ, 
i.e., in the whole Book of Job. But even a casual reader 
may clearly perceive, that the lesson which the Lord God 
Jehovah intended to impart to mankind in the one eight- 
worded question, which appears at the head of this article, 
is, that true knowledge and wisdom can alone emanate from 
the Creator Himself. 

Therefore I am rejoiced to announce to my readers that 
I hav e been favoured with an early copy of a new work by 
Dr. Bullinger, on the Book of Job.* Part I., giving its scope, 
as containing the “ oldest lesson in the world ; ”f and Part 
II.. giving a new translation of the whole book. 

It is with the latter that we are principally concerned 
now ; because, for the first time, that wonderful and beau¬ 
tiful book is made intelligible to English readers. 

Both the a.V. and R.V. are, as is well-known, in many 
places quite incoherent—conveying and containing inade¬ 
quate reasonable meaning. Of course, I need hardly add 
that there could be no improvement made to the original. 

•Note.—P ublished bv Eyre &. Spottiswoocle. 33, Paternoster Row, E.C. 
Price, 5/- cloth ; 7/b leather (suitable for presents). 

To be obtained aNo of the Ed. of The Earth. 
fXOTE. —For the justification of the translation, where it differs from the a. 
our readers must consult Dr. Bullinger’s work itself. 



Dr. Bullinger’s new translation is based on six great 
principles, which make it quite unique, (i) It is Rhythmical; 

(2) It gives the Structure of the whole and every portion. 

(3) It notes and translates all the Figures of Speech. (4) It 
is Idiomatic. (5) It is Critical , giving the notes from Dr. 
Ginsburg’s Hebrew Text. (6) It distinguishes and preserves 
the various Divine Names and Titles. 

The work will specially interest readers of The Earth , f or 
they are aware how much the Book of Job has to say about 
Astronomy, and about the Earth. 

Dr. Bullinger says however, that while the book contains 
a divinely inspired account of what the various speakers 
said, it does not follow that what they said was inspired. 
He passes over, therefore, the references to Astronomv made 
by Job and his friends, for though we may regard them as 
representing the current beliefs of themselves and their 
times, yet they cannot be cited as Divine utterances. 

It is quite a different matter, however, when we come to 
the words of Jehovah Himself, in chapters xxxviii., xxxix., 
and xl. There we have the Creator of Heaven and Earth 
speaking of His own works. He who created all things is 
the only One who knows all about them and is able to reveal 

It is wonderful to read His own words about His own 
works, and Dr. Bullinger has succeeded in making the words 
live before our eyes. We sometimes hear of young ladies’ 
circles for reading Tennyson or Browning, &c. We shall 
be surprised, if among Christians there are not circles formed 
for reading this wonderful book, if only for the beautiful 
English in which it is presented. 

When we come to Jehovah’s own address to Job, we see 
that it is divided into two parts. Each is followed by an 
utterance of Job : the first time to say he could not answer ; 
and the second time to answer to some purpose. 

The two parts of Jehovah’s great address are about two 
great departments of His creative work. The first about the 
Inanimate Creation; and the second about the Animate 

It is with the former of these that the readers of The Earth 
will be specially interested. 

As we read it in the A.V., it seems a jumble—and the 
various subjects seemed to be mixed up in hopeless confusion; 


but Dr. Bullinger shows us the Structure, and we see at 
once, as it is presented to the eye, how perfect and yet how 
simple it all is. We give 

The Structure of Job xxxviii. 4 — 35 . 



A | 4-7. The Earth. 


a 1 

| 8-11. The Sea. 



b | 12-15. The Dawn. 




to the 

a 2 

| 16-18. The Springs of the Sea. 



C | 19-. Light. 

1 Thingspertain- 
1 ing to both 

1 the heavens and 

C | 19-21. Darkness. 


the earth. 



I 22, 23. Snow and Hail. 

I Things 

b | 24-27. Lightning. 

1 pertaining 

| to the 

a 2 

| 28-30. Rain, Dew, and Frost. 


A | 31 - 35 - 

The Heavens. 

It will be 

seen that first we have the Earth < 


vv. 4-7.) 

This is balanced by the Heavens (A. vv. 3 1 — 35 )• 1 hen, 

following the Earth, we have (B vv. 8-18) things pertaining 
to the Earth. Then again alternate, Liquids and Light. 

Then in the centre we have Light and Darkness (C N C, 
vv. 19-21). 

Then, balancing the things of the Earth, we have ( B , vv. 
22-30) the things pertaining to the heavens, leading up to 
the Heavens themselves, (A. vv. 31-35)- 

We will now take the liberty of giving our readers the 
whole of the first part of Jehovah’s address, about 

The Inanimate Creation. 



They will not fail to notice two great points : — 

, (1) How absolutely incompatible is the theory of Evolution 

in the face of this Scripture. One must go ; and the theory 
of Evolution must vanish, before the fact of Creation. 

(2) How plainly the gropings of scientists stand exposed. 
Time was when they thought they knew so much, that, like 
school-boys, they thought “ the Book was wrong.” But 
to-day—every fresh discovery of fact shows the falsity of their 
old exploded theories, and the wondrous perfection of the 
Divine Word. Once, they thought they knew all about 
“ Light,” and they laughed at the statements in this chapter : 
Now they find they know so little they are beginning to 
discover something of the meaning of His words, when 
Jehovah speaks of “the parting of the light.” 

But we must now give the translation itself. 

A, (vv. 4-7).—The Earth. 

4. Where wast thou when I Earth’s foundations laid? 

Say ; if thou know, and understandest it. 

5. Who fixed its measurements (for thou wilt know) ? 

Or, Who upon it stretched out the line ? 

6. On what were its foundations made to rest ? 

Or, Who its corner-stone [so truly] laid ? 

7. When all the morning stars in chorus sang, 

And all the sons of God did shout for joy. 

a 1 , (vv. 8-11).—The Sea. 

8. Or, Who fenced in with doors the [roaring] sea, 
When bursting forth from [Nature’s] womb it came ? 

9. What time I made the clouds its covering robe, 

And darkness deep the swaddling band thereof? 

10. When I decreed for it My boundary, 

And set its bars and doors, and to it said 

11. “Thus far—no farther; Ocean, shalt thou come; 

“ Here shalt thou stay the swelling of thy waves ? ” 

b, ( vv. . 12-15).— The Morn and Dawn. 

12. Hast thou called morning forth since thou wast born, 
Or, taught the early Dawn to know its place ? 

13. [Bid Morn] lay hold on outskirts of the Earth, 

[Taught Dawn] to rout the lawless from their place? 




,4. [Bid Morn] change earth as clay beneath the seal, 

[Bid Dawn] enrobe the beauteous world with light ? 
c Thus Morning robs the wicked of their prey ; 

And stays, arrested, the uplifted arm. 

a 2 , (vv. 16-18).—The Springs of the Sea. 

16. The fountains of the Sea; hast thou explored? 

Or, Hast thou searched the secrets of the Deep ? 

17. The gates of Death J Have they been shown to thee ? 
Or, Hast thou seen the portals of its shade? 

18. The utmost breadths of earth : Hast thou surveyed ? 
Reply, if thou hast knowledge of it all. 

C and C (vv. 19-21). — LIGHT AND Darkness. 

19. Where lies the way that leads to Light’s abode ? 

And as for Darkness : Where’s the place thereof; 

20. That thou shouldst bring each to its proper bound 
And know the paths that lead unto its house? 

21. Thou know’st [of course] : thou must have been then 

born ; 

And great must be the number of thy days. 

a 1 , (vv. 22, 23).—Snow and Hail. 

22. The Treasuries of Snow : Hast thou approached ? 

Or, Hast thou seen the store-house of the Hail ? 

23. Which ’gainst a time of trouble I have kept, 

Against a day of battle and of war. 

b (vv. 24-27). — Lightning and Thunder. 

24. By what way part themselves the rays of Light ? 

How drives the East-wind o’er the earth its course? 

25. Who cleft a channel for the floods of rain ? 

Or passage for the sudden Thunder-flash ? 

26. So that it rains on lands where no one dwells, 

On wilderness where no man hath his house ; 

27. To saturate the wild and thirsty waste, 

And cause the meadows’ tender herb to shoot. 

a * , (vv. 28-30).—Rain, Dew, and Frost. 

28. The Rain : Hath it a father [besides Me] ? 

The drops of Dew : Who hath begotten them ? 


29. Whose is the womb whence cometh forth the Ice ? 

And heav’n’s Hoar-frost, Who gave to it its birth ? 

30. As, turned to stone, the waters hide themselves ; 

The surface of the deep, congeal’d, coheres. 

A (vv. 31 — 35 )- —The Heavens. 

31. Canst thou bind fast the cluster Pleiades? 

Or, canst thou loosen great Orion’s bands ? 

32. Canst thou lead forth the Zodiacs monthly Signs ? 

Or, canst thou guide Arcturus and his sons ? 

33. The statutes of the heavens: Know’st thou these ? 

Didst thou set its dominion o’er the Earth ? 

34. Ihe clouds: to them canst thou lift up thy voice 
That plenteousness of rain may cover thee ? 

35. Canst thou send lightnings forth, that they may go 
And say to thee c Behold us ! Here we are ? 

I wish I had space to give more, but the above will serve 
as a specimen of Dr. Bullinger’s work ; while it will be of 
special interest to all Zetetics, as bringing out the grandeur 
of Jehovah s words as He speaks of«His own works. 


I he narrative of the latest Antarctic Expedition, under 
Captain Scott of the ship Discoeiy, is on the table before me. 

I read this report with the greatest avidity. My first, and, 
indeed, my chief, anxiety was to find some genuine evidence 
of the midnight sun down south, in keeping with stories 
which were circulated by the men of the ship Morning , on 
their landing in England. 

At the time that these curious reports were circulated, I 
judged them to be thoroughly irresponsible, and now that 
I have read Captain Cook’s highly responsible narrative 
I remain in just the same state of mind as before, in that, 
from first to last there is not the faintest mention of any 
Midnight Sun, or of any continued daylight,—but the whole 
phraseology of the report is distinctly in opposition to any 
such conclusion, and I find the 24 hours invariably divided 


into the usual intervals of morning and evening, noon and 

The sun also is spoken ot as going and coming, and as 
rising, and as being beloiv the horizon , and consequently as 
setting also. This appears to be about September, and is of 
the utmost importance, in that the point of sunrise is clearly 
indicated in one instance, showing that the sun actually rose 
about East North East—northerly—and lit up the sides of 
the mountains facing north. This point of sunrise is of the 
utmost importance, because, if the earth were a globe, the 
sun must have risen about due East, and the eastern sides 
of the mountains would have been lit up “ by the glow of 
the sun” when “still below the horizon;” whereas the 
passage goes on to say that “ the other sides were dark and 

The word ‘■'■shadowy” has also great weight in it, because 
the shadow would of course be to the South, and just op¬ 
posite to the point of sunrise. Here then—and in the words 
of the authorities themselves—we have clear proof that the 
sun not only rose above the horizon, but also,—and this is 
the crucial point—-rose in addition to the Northward , and 
not East nor South as it must have done had the earth been 
a revolving and spinning globe and the sun itself a stationary 

l'he sun is spoken of, on this occasion, as “ returning." 
What does returning mean ? Clearly, that the sun was not 
stationary, but on’ the move , and that during the Antarctic 
winter the sun had moved into northern latitudes, and was, 
in September, “ returning" south again, and thus made the 
Antarctic summer, or the resemblance of a summer, which is 
about as much as they really get in those extreme latitudes. 

Further, I have now very much pleasure in pointing out 
that these extreme latitudes are possible only on one con¬ 
dition, and that condition is that the sun’s path, during our 
winter months, is in fact a sharp ellipse. Of this I am 
certainly positive, and without it the latitudes down south 
could not, and would not, exist. It may encourage readers 
to believe me if I say how I obtained the knowledge of the 
sun’s daily path being an ellipse during our winter months. 

It occurred this way. When fifteen years of age, I went 
a voyage to Australia in my cousin’s ship, The Albemarle. 
W'e had a first officer, named Mr. Merritt, and he was the 


smartest of the smart ; the best trimmer of canvas I ever 
met with, and a gentleman and philosopher. When taking 
the sun, at 12 (midday), he would occasionally talk to him¬ 
self aloud, and this more frequently as we approached Aus¬ 
tralia. As I was always looking on I used to hear his aud¬ 
ible but no doubt (as he thought) private chat. His method 
of “ taking the sun ” was purely his own, and very clever. 
He usually commenced about ten minutes before noon, and 
kept constantly turning to the compass, so as to note the 
bearings (as I naturally suppose) of the ship’s head and 
the sun. 

On some of these occasions he would say : “ The sun’s 
path must have a great ellipse on it.” This he would repeat 
several times nearly every day, until the sun came almost 
plumb overhead and the observation almost impossible. 

Now reader, you will understand how I know that the 
sun s daily path must have a great ellipse on it; and many 
years of plan making confirms me in the belief that it must 
be so. And it is this ellipse alone which admits of southern 
latitudes in the direction of New Zealand ; without it those 
latitudes are quite impossible on a Plane Earth, as the dis¬ 
tances would be preposterous and convey the idea that the 
Plane Earth is nothing more than the globe flattened out. 

1 his, of course, is not the case, and I am exceedingly 
obliged to Lady Blount, whose highly superior and clear 
discernment enabled her, without human aid, to use her 
God-given judgment and to abandon a former map of the 
earth which was a flattening of the globe, pure and simple. 
It looked very nice, I admit, but was hopelessly astray for 
all that, and only served as an amusing bogey for the scien¬ 
tific members of the Royal Geographical Society to poke 
fun at; and pianists have to thank her ladyship for uphold¬ 
ing my skeleton, but possible, plans in lieu of that costly 
affair. By means of my plans we shall, no doubt, arrive at 
something conclusive—finally genuine and acceptable—but 
perhaps, not in my life-time, as I well know the veritable 
difficulties of the case, and also know that hurry is not 
speed in this matter, which is too big for one life-time. 

I do not wish to fall into the same error of immensity as 
the astronomers. 1 heir whole idea of a God-glorious Cre¬ 
ation is immensity —impossible and impracticable immensity 
—whereby they overlook the kernel to eat the shell. Speak- 




ing of our earth (the kernel), they say it has no significance 
whatever, but is dwarfed by millions of stars, suns, and 
other worlds, which apparently create themselves. In this 
they are very much mistaken, as our earth is by far the 
largest , which in itself is not a bad bid for significance. The 
sun is undoubtedly only 32 miles in diameter, and this can 
be so easily proved, that I wonder at their persistence in a 
hopeless and untenable position. 

To recur more directly to the account of the Antarctic 
Expedition. There is positively no mention of, nor even 
suggestion of, the continuous daylight so often claimed for 
the Antarctic regions ; but morning and evening, noon and 
night, is the repeated language of the narrative throughout. 

Fine nights may have occurred now and then, but such 
must have been caused by the moon, which appears to leave 
these latitudes every month tor a few days, and probably 
goes away south in the interval. 

The "flat horizon ” is also spoken of, and at the same 
time geographical miles. These expressions are inconsistent, 
one with the other. The horizon was of course flat , and 
the miles were also statute miles (as are all miles on maps), 
The map makers know this quite well. 

I have now said sufficient to show that the Antarctic Ex¬ 
pedition furnishes further proof that the earth is a plane 
surface ; but sunset still admits of a few explanatory remarks. 
This feature is very important. The sun, without doubt, sets 
away to the northward, and not southerly nor due West, as 
it would do on a globe ; thus, to the ship Discovery , it might 
make a Midnight Sun, much in the same direction as the 
Midnight Sun when seen from the North Cape—the main 
difference being that the sun is further to the southward, 
and therefore invisible to a spectator at North Cape, Norway. 
But for this difference of distance the two Midnight Suns 
—North and South—might be described as visible almost 
from the same place. 

This is very fairly shown on my diagram. I he midnight 
sun at North Cape is lost to view, owing to increasing dis¬ 
tance from the observer, about August, and it gradually 
increases its distance still further South—till Christmas Day 
—but, owing to the ellipse of the sun, its return path North¬ 
wards from the Discovery crosses the meridian of Greenwich 
again, and eastward from the locality of the Midnight Sun 
as seen from North Cape. 



A<f ^o 3s , o Middletons attempted 


1 he elliptical path of the sun most certainly invites the 
closest observation, such as might perhaps be acheived from 
the observatory of Ben Nevis. This observatory I am told 
cost ^5,000 to establish, but is now to be dismantled—may 
I ask why ? Is it found to be too inconvenient, as telling 
tales? Or what other reason is to be put forward for the 
dismantling of an observatory, just calculated by its position 
to be of the highest service ? Have they actually seen the 
Southern Midnight Sun from it ? and is this the reason 
for its abandonment ? We of the Pianist School have no 
terror of any hidden secrets which such an observatory would 
disclose. As a set off to this abandonment, will some rich 


_ * 

pianist try a captive balloon from North Cape—to go up like 
the French Balloon—say a mile high ? 

Depend upon it, the aeronauts in such a balloon will see 
the Midnight Sun, such as may possibly be seen by South 
Poleites, in common with the crew of the Discovery. 



By Lady Blount. 

(continued from p. 276). 

The stars, which are not many thousand miles high, dis¬ 
appear by perspective as we go further away from them. 
And with respect to the sun, as I have before stated, it is not 
sufficiently large, nor sufficiently high, to light all of the 
world at one.and the same time.” 

Astronomers assert that the stars and sun are larger than 
our earth, and, as they locate these so-called “worlds” 
thousands and millions of miles away in space, their light 
would shine upon the portions of the “globe” (?) so revolv¬ 
ing as to receive their light. But we have not the shadow 
of proof that the stars are much more than spots of light; 
they have not been proved even to have a disc or body. 
They are therefore too small to be seen over the entire earth 
at once. The highest power telescope has failed to make 
them look any larger. It only makes their light seem 
brighter, but does not affect their size. 

It is said, and the evidence favours the deduction, that 
there are constellations of stars characteristic of the southern 
as well as the northern parts of the earth, and that these 
constellations revolve around their separate centres respect¬ 
ively. 1 think Zetetics will have to admit this. 

Let us note, however, that the Great Bear is at all times 
visible from every meridian, and high up in the heavens, 
north of the Equator. I have been informed that Sigma 
Octantis and the southern constellations are not seen until 
you get some 8, 14, and 16 degrees south of the Equator, 
but I know not whether this statement is authentic. The 



Southern Cross should at all times be visible from every 
known and habitable point of the southern “ hemisphere ” 
(so-called) as the Great Bear is from every point in the 
North ; but I am told it is not so. 

The great traveller, Humboldt, says : “ We saw distinctly 
for the first time the Cross of the South on the nights of 
4th and 5th July, in the 16th degree latitude ; it was strongly 
inclined low down on the eastern horizon. 

The sun is a somewhat large body emitting heat and light, 
but, compared with the earth it is a small body, possibly 
contained within an environment of about 30 miles, and thus 
it can only light up one part of the earth at one time. For 
every 15 degrees of longitude West the time of day is one 
hour later. The cause of this difference in the time of day 
in different places is because the sun goes round earlier or 
later to some places than to others, lighting them up in 
succession, hour after hour. 

The outstretched heavens above appear a dome, 

To everyone on earth—where e’er lie roam 
He sees a dome or vault, above each station, 

As many domes as points of observation. 

Of these apparent domes there is no dearth, 

Each man beholds the same above the earth. 

My Zenith’s highest point—just where I stand 
Forms the horizon to a distant land, 

And while those far oft West on sunrise feast, 

My noon is someone’s sunset in the East. 


Regarding the above, a friend and critic, Mr. Caldwell 
Harpur, writes : “ I have been wondering why you did not 
utilize that passage in Whitaker's Almanack , which is the 
strongest argument on your side I have seen for a long 
time, and which in my opinion raises the chance of Zetetics 
being right. 

“ I called your attention to it in my letter of 22nd Jan., 
but here it is again. Rage 674 of 2/6 edition, 1903, 
‘ Rather more than half a century ago an instrument called 
a reflex-zenith tube was invented by Professor Airy, and 
erected at the Greenwich Observatory, to determine the 
aberration, constant, and parallax of the ‘ Greenwich star,’ 



Gamma Draconis. The result, however, proved disappoint¬ 
ing, and no treatment of the observations gave other than 
a negative result for the parallax, and a constant of aberra¬ 
tion widely different from other determinations.’ ” 

“ Now the 1 aberration ’ of the fixed stars forms the chief 
proof of the motion of the earth round the sun, a proof 
much more relied on by astronomers than the pendulum 
proof (which only proves rotation) and is but 100 years older. 
If then the ‘ aberration ’ does not exist, Newtonian astronomy 
has received a severer blow than any yet dealt it. 

The above corroborates the fact which I have often pointed 
out to my readers, viz. : that we pianists can prove by ocular 
demonstration, by tracing star motions and eclipse cycles 
in backward course, that the teaching of the Bible is reliable 
in its statement that the Creator “ hath founded the, earth 
on her basis that it shall not be removed for ever ; ” as it 
does in setting forth Life and Re-Creation in and through the 
Lord Jesus our blessed Redeemer. 

Why should Christians lightly give up their belief in God’s 
Word, and in the glorious promises of Life and Immortality, 
through our Lord Jesus? The astronomers’ system of the 
Universe is founded upon assumption ; and shall we give 
up our belief in God’s Word for the sake of a set of un¬ 
proved assumptions ? No never ! 

The Relative Positions of the signs of the 
Zodiac Over the Plane Earth. 

A M G Q represents the Celestial Equator. The point A, 
when the sun is on the Equator, represents the first point 
of Aries ; B the first point of Taurus; C of Gemini; D of 
Cancer, when the sun is 23^° north declination. 

The next division represents Leo ; the next Virgo ; and 
C the first point of Libra, when the sun is again on the 
Equator, and the days and nights are equal. For these 
points A and G are called the equinoxes. 

The rest of the signs go south, namely Scorpio, Sagit¬ 
tarius, Capricorn, at point J, when the sun has 23A 0 south 
declination ; then I<U Aquarius and Pisces. 

The line joined to twelve points ABCDEFGHIJKL, 
is called the Ecliptic, and represents the sun’s relative 
positions, on the Ecliptic, in the twelve signs during the 
twelve months of the year. 

In a future article I hope to give something further on 
Eclipses. But for the present I would refer my readers to 
my articles in The Earth —Nos. 8 & 9, p. 99 ; Nos. 19 & 20, 
p. 121 ; Nos. 21 & 22, p. 149. Suffice it now to remind 
you that eclipses are like sentinels, reminding us not only 
of the progress of time since Creation, but telling forth that 
the time is approaching when One greater than any mere 
human astronomer has said: “The sun shall be darkened 
and the moon turned into blood, before the great and not¬ 
able day of the Lord.” When this prophecy is fulfilled it 
will further prove the Bible to be more reliable than this 
world’s scientists, who would have us believe that the moon’s 
light is but reflected sunlight. 

N.B.—The first diagram printed in “ Celestial 
Phenomena ” was the wrong one, and used 
by the printer in error. 



Their respective Stars and Their Motions, etc. 

Mr. Cook says that deductions are predicated. 

He also replies in the affirmative to my third question, 
saying: “at the Equator all days are practically 12 hours 
in length. In our latitude (31 0 57 ^ S) they vary from a .little 
over 14 hours to a little under iohours. Further south they 
vary within greater limits.” By this reply Mr. Cooke leaves 
the question to a great extent in its original position. 

It appears evident to us that the differences which exist 
in the north and south would not be possible, if the earth 
were a globe turning upon an axis underneath a non-moving 
sun. The two hemispheres would, at the same latitudes, 
have the same general phenomena, both in kind and degree ; 
but the peculiarities which we believe exist in the south as 
compared with the north, are only such as could exist upon 
a stationary plane. • 1 ■ * 

In the north 1 the light dn summer evenings seems unwill¬ 
ing to terminate; but in the south we are informed that the 
reverse is the case the day ending suddenly, and the night 
also passes into day in a few seconds. 

Mr. Cooke —in reply to the questions : “ Does the sun ever 
shine on the south side of buildings in places more than 23k 
degrees south of the Equator? Where, and for how long?' 
And at what time of the'year ?—says that, “in the early 
morning and late afternoon, the sun shines upon the south 
side of buildings between September 23rd and March 21st, 
at places more than 23^’ south of the Equator the sun- 
never shines on the south side at mid-day ; at places between 
the Equator and lat. 23^° S, the sun shines on the south 
wall throughout the day at Midsummer (December). 

Mr. Cooke's replies to the other questions are for the 
most part as favourable to the plane earth postulation as to 
the globular hypothesis ; at the same-time he makes a stand 
for the globular theory, though he gives a decided No'’ to 
the question : “ Are you going to take up the proof that the 
earth is a globe ? ” He cannot explain the Bedford Canal 
experiment on the Globular hypothesis'. 

He says : “If 1 were near the canal 1 should repeat 




the experiment myself just out of curiosity, but should be 
quite prepared to wager my entire belongings that there 
is a mistake somewhere about your accepted account.” We 
can assure Mr. Cooke there is no mistake. 

The Perth Astronomer’s contention that the modern cal¬ 
culations in respect to the recurrences of lunar eclipses being 
so accurate proves the truth of the globular hypothesis, is 
weak in fact. The only improvement that modern astron¬ 
omers have made is in the observations upon the differenti¬ 
ations of eclipse cycles for hundreds of years, and arriving 
at more accurate results, irrespective of any theory as to 
the motion of the sun and the stability of the earth, or vice- 

The integrity and ingenuity of the Perth Astronomer is 
unquestioned. He endeavours, by means of a “ model sky,” 
&c., to teach the young idea to understand something about 
modern astronomy, and in his magazine, entitled The Edu¬ 
cation Circular (Western Australia), the APPARENT move¬ 
ments of the sun. In laying down the north and south points 
he says : “We APPEAR to be situated upon a plane bounded 
by a circle called the horizon, and surrounded by a hemis¬ 
phere called the sky, on the surface of which the sun 
APPEARS to describe a semi-circle every day. It is found 
that the sun is steadily moving eastward amongst the stars, 
taking exactly a year to complete one revolution.” (Capitals 
ours.) But having admitted so much, Mr. Cooke cannot 
lose sight of the fact that, in his position as the Govern¬ 
ment Astronomer, it is necessary for him to assert that it is 
really an apparent movement of the sun eastward among 
the stars, and that the earth rotates on its axis. He asks : 
“ Is it at all likely that the sun and stars really move round 
the pole once a day, as they seem to do ?” We reply : “Yes, 
most decidedly—-and the enormous distance away from the 
earth of the sun and other orbs is only an assumption devoid 
of a shred of tangible proof.” 


Metric—from the Greek me Iron, metrikos (“ measure ”)— 
is the term applied to a system of measures of length, ca¬ 



pacity, and weights. It is a modern system, of continental 
origin, practically originating in France. Metre is the fun¬ 
damental unit of length of the French Metric system. It 
was intended to be one ten-millionth part of the earth s 
assumed “ meridian quadrant,” (i.e.: “ a quarter of the earth s 
meridian”). Closely connected with the metric system was 
the proposed division of the right angle, or circular quad¬ 
rant, into 100 equal parts, instead of 90 0 (90 degrees); but 
this has not met with much favour. 

The system itself has been decimalized as far as possible ; 
i.e., weights, lengths, measures of quantities and capacity, 
have been divided into hundredths and tenths, and multiply¬ 
ing forward by tens and hundreds up to thousands and mill¬ 
ions—these, in their turn, being capable of division into hun¬ 
dreds and tenths by the decimal method. The monetary 
system of France, and other continental nations, is subjected 
to this decimal system. 

Some years ago there was a decimal craze in Prance, 
where it was attempted to decimalize the hours, days, weeks, 
and months of the year. The day and night were to be 
divided into two portions of 10 hours each—making a full 
day and night of 20 hours, and the week was to consist of 
10 days, and so on. As a matter of fact, the week of 10 
days was attempted to be put into practice in France. This 
attempt to nullify the chronology of Genesis, by abrogating 
the week of seven days and “ The Seventh Day Sabbath,” 
was a failure, although a paganized Christian Church has 
made it fashionable to keep the first day of the week in place 
of observing “ The Seventh Day Sabbath.” 

Time and its divisions cannot be decimalized, lime and 
seasons have their root-origin founded on the bed-rock of 
Truth (the Bible). In this respect the Anglo-Saxons (a 
Bible-respecting race, honoured by God,) have associated 
tbenselves with Bible teaching, though, for the most part, 
t ev ha\ e consented to keep the first day of the week instead 
of “ The Seventh Day ” which God appointed. 

A metre being the fundamental unit of length of the 
French metrical system, and one ten-millionth part of the 
assumed earth’s meridian quadrant, its length is 39 - 37 ° 
inches, i e. : nearly 3-ft. 3 jj-in., and it is . the Flench equiva¬ 
lent of the English yard, or about 36 inches, (said to be the 
length of a pendulum vibrating seconds of mean time fro n 
which the yard is computed). 



The metrical mile consists of 1,000 French metres (f-ths 
mile, one kilometre, or 1,093 English yards) the old Roman 
mile (miliare) being the inille passus, or 1,000 paces, of the 
Romans—a Roman mile being 1,614, and an English mile 
1,760 yards (5,280 feet), a square mile being 6,400 square 
chains (640 acres). 

A millemetre is the 1,000-th part of a metre ; a centimetre, 
the 1 oo-th part of a metre ; a decimetre, the 10th part of a 
metre. But ‘ 12 ’ finds a part in the metric system of length 
—a line being 1/12-inch, and an inch 1/12-foot. A geo¬ 
graphical mile is the 60-th of a degree of latitude (about 
2,025 yards), in use in England and Italy. The unit of sur¬ 
face is the arc, which is 100 square metres. 

The metric system, as applied to capacity, is in vogue 
with chemists A litre is 17598 pint (35] fluid ozs. and 
11 minims) which is the volume of 1 kilogram of distilled 
water at its maximum density, and is therefore intended to 
be 1 cubic decimetre, or 15432-348 grain measures. A litre 
contains 1,000 French grammes. 

For 10 times, 100 times, 1,000 times, and 10,000 times*— 
deca , hecto, kilo , and myria are respectively used. Micron 
is used by the National Commission for one-millionth of a 
metre. Deci, centi , and inilli are used as prefixes. 

The foregoing metric measures have been given so as to 
show the basis of the Metric System—and the measures, 
as also the weights, are computed to a nicety. They have 
their uses in the laboratory, and in arriving at delicate 
equations ; but in ordinary commerce old English weights 
and measures are to be preferred to the Metric System. 

E. A. M. B. 


By a Clergyman op the Ch. of England. 

In almost every illustrated Geography book, in which its 
author wishes to prove the globularity of the earth, he re¬ 
presents—among other attempts—a ship bound on an out¬ 
ward voyage, looking, with its observer and the sea on which 


31 I 

it sails, like this :—An 
observer is seen standing 
on the shore, watching 
the departure of a ship ; 
and one and the same 
vessel is seen at three 
different points of dis¬ 
tance from the observer, marked a , b, and c. T. he sea sur¬ 
face over which the vessel is sailing, is shaped by the geo¬ 
graphical artist into a curve. The observer, 0, in the scene, 
occupies a position somewhere near the “ north pole ; no 
land being visible above and beyond him. In this standing 
attitude he invariably forms a perpendicular line from head 
to foot, according to the plumb-line principle ; the heavens 
being always above him ; and the earth, on which he stands, 
equally- beneath him. The sea —according to the illustration 
— is given the form of a receding downward curvature. The 
eye-line like any ray of light, which is always an absolutely 
straight line is seen to pass the vessel a (nearest the ob¬ 
server) through its rigging ; a few miles further away, at b, 
along its hull ; and a few miles further still, at c, the boat 
is wholly out of sight ; because the eye-line of the observer 
being (by nature) straight , and the sea-surface being given 
a downward convex line by the theoretic artist, necessarily the 
eve-line goes oft' at a tangent above and beyond c. 

Now, such an appearance of the sea has never y-et been 
taken PHOTOGRAPHICALLY! Why not, when kodaks 
are so plentiful,cheap,and portable ; when thousands of travel¬ 
lers, in every part of the world, possess them, and have photo¬ 
graphed sea-scapes as well as landscapes ? Simply- because 
it has never been known in nature that the surface of the 
sea should form a curvature ! 

IVater whether in a saucer, a pond, or a sea, is always 
level; it may flow down ; it never rises above its level, un¬ 
less forced bv art *, it lies alway-s horizontal / and neithei dia¬ 
gonal nor curved. Millions of people have witnessed the 
departure of a ship on its outward journey, and in every 
instance both hull and sea were parallel to each other, and 
were equally horizontal , the masts forming a perpendiculai 
line at right angles with hull i ifcjR. 

and sea surface like this : - hk. 

But what has been seen, photographed, and drawn or 



painted, when according to nature, never represented the 
sea as a convex body of water, but always horizontal, and a 
ship seen at different distances appeared smaller to the 
observer, the farther it was removed from his eye, but always 
on a horizontal, or » , 

level, sea like this : _ 

The diminishing of 

the size of the vessel is to be accounted for by the fact 
that the eye cannot see a ship as large ten miles in the 
distance as when only one mile from the shore, because the 
eye-pozver is limited with regard to distance. Rut this phy¬ 
siological fact has nothing whatever to do with the form of 
the earth, the sea, or the sky, any more than with the sub¬ 
stance of each, but solely with distance. Hence the nearer 
a ship is to the shore the larger it appears to be in size as 
compared with one farther away ; and the farther it recedes 
from the shore the smaller it appears, until the vessel is en¬ 
tirely lost to view, when the eye-line has reached its limit, 
like this : . .. A a 

The observer, o, can see the ship at a , b, c, d, e, but it is 
invisible at /because the sight- force is spent, or has reached 
its limit at e, and can extend no farther into the distance 
beyond it. 

Again, an observer, on board a ship, looking at a house 
near the shore, has seen it much larger than when two or 
three miles in the distance, > . 

as follows: Mi KTvH «, 

A person standing but a couple of yards from a telegraph 
post has had to raise his chin, strain his neck, and compress 
the nape, as he lifts up his eyes towards the wires that pass 
very near the top of the telegraph post, like this : jfc 
But when the same person has moved about 300 
yards from the very same post, he is obliged to look 
down while his eyes still rest on the same wires as v 

they pass the same post, like *... f 

this : J . . t 

observer, sight-line, and the 

earth, forming an obtuse triangle, £. 

like this : »- —— " —- 

(to be continued, D. V.) 




By E. H. RICHES, LL.D., F.R.A.S., 

Member of the “ London Mathematical Society ,” 
late Cantab, etc. 

(continued from p. 266.) 

Philosophers may be wrong. Astronomers may be only 
right in theii general theory up to a point. The earth which 
is “ stretched out upon the waters,” founded on the seas, and 
established on the floods,” and “ standing in the water and 
out of the water,” may after all be a plane ! Let us suppose 
it to be a plane, as the experiments, which we have consider¬ 
ed, certainly tend to show. Let 11s suppose it to be literally 
“ stretched out upon the waters,’’ and in so doing by the 
consideration of certain facts with reference to the position 
of different countries with respect to each other. 

The land then which is known to us, we will regard as a 
quantity of matter “ stretched out upon the waters,” the 
surface of both being a plane, or in other words the whole 
collection of land and water known to us on the supposed 
convex surface of the world to be reduced to a plane. This 
being done, what becomes of the north and south poles ? 
The north pole might still be regarded to be in the same 
position as it is now, but what becomes of the south pole ? 
In this vast plane we naturally are at a loss to decide upon 
its limit ! How far away from our known land do the waters 
surrounding it stretch in all directions ? 

Phis is beyond our power to decide, or even guess at, if 
the vast plane which we have been supposing really does 
exist. Who can tell of the boundless extent of the “world 
without end,” or who dare say that there is any limit to the 
waters which, maybe, extend into infinite space ? In the 
consideration of this vast plane, the surrounding waters of 
the earth must be, what is called by philosophers, the south 
pole, which has been regarded to be in a similar position to 
the north pole, at the other extreme of the supposed globe 
The space within the Arctic Circle has been explored to a 
certain extent by navigators, but the space within the Ant¬ 
arctic Circle at the South Foie has never been. I he most 
experienced navigators have always failed to make any pro- 




gress of importance at the South Pole, and all reckoning 
and calculating have been baffled. 

The barriers of ice at the South Pole have prevented navi¬ 
gators from penetrating far ; and even as far as they have gone, 
they have been much puzzled by a total disarrangement of 
their calculations. In the account of one of his voyages Sir 
James Clark Ross observes: “We found ourselves every 
day from 12 to 16 miles by observation in advance of our 
reckoning ; ” and again : “ by our observations we found 
ourselves 58 miles to the eastward by our reckoning in two 

Up to the present time no navigator that has been heard 
of has succeeded in sailing round, the world within or upon 
the Antarctic Circle ; and.if the Antarctic Circle was similarly 
placed in the south to the corresponding Arctic, Circle in 
the north, where were the difficulty in sailing round it ? 
At the north, navigators have found.none of the disarrange¬ 
ment of their calculations that has always perplexed them 
at the south. Tor this there must be a reason ; and if ; what 
we have defined to be the Antarctic Circle be really a,>very 
large circle, or glacial boundary, at a certain distance from 
the region of our known land in the vast plane, the truth of 
the reports of navigators ■ who have attempted to jsail round 
the world at the south, may easily be imagined- And it 
may be remembered here that with respect to the fact noticed 
by aeronauts,' that the surface of the earth from a balloon 
appears to be concave, and that the horizon appears always 
on a level with the car of the balloon, is quite agreeable to* 
certain facts in connection with, and ruled by perspective,, 
and the reasonable and universal testimony that the nature 
and limits of our vision explains how the shapes, arid gen¬ 
eral appearances of various phenomena are evidently gov-, 
erned by the laws of optics. Regarding atmospheric 
pressure, I will give the following quotation from Captain 
Ross's voyages : “ Our barometrical experiments appear 

to prove that a gradual diminution of atmospheric pres¬ 
sure occurs as we proceed southwards from the tropic 
of Capricorn .’’ Further on he says : “ It has hitherto been 
considered that the mean pressure of the atmosphere at the 
level of the sea was nearly the same in all parts of the world,- 
as no material difference.occurs between the equator and 
the highest northern latitudes.” And again,, he observes : 


“The causes of the atmospheric pressure being so very much 
less in the southern than in the northern hemispheres re¬ 
mains to be determined.” 

(to be continued). 


“ The accompanying diagram will enable the reader to 
comprehend the ordinary conceptions of an ancient Semite 
(whether Babylonian or Hebrew) respecting the universe in 
which he lived. The writer of this article sketched this 
outline from a study of numerous Old Testament passages, 

-~ 7 Thom RabbaH- — 

about twelve years-ago, and found in Jensen’s “ Cosmologie 
der Bab,” published in 1890, a diagram almost identical in 
character, descriptive of the universe according to Babylonian 
conceptions, and based purely upon the data of cunieform 

316 extract from Hastings, bible dictionary. 

--rr- In both we have a heavenl y upper ocean, and 
in oth the earth was conceived as resting upon a vast water- 
depth or Tehom (called also in Babylonian, apsu). The 
Hebrews thought of the world as a disc [circle, oilsa. xl. 

/ n’ ^ , t0 thlS earthl y disc corresponded the heavenly disc 
(called also circuit, of Job xxii. 14, Pr. viii. 27). 

Beneath the world rested the unknown and mysterious 
lehom (of the language of Ps. xxiv. 3). The Flood 
not only-descended through the windows of heaven but also 
ascended from the deep nether springs, called “ springs of 
the great Tehom" ( Gen. vii. 11), which were cleft open, 
t hese deep springs were accordingly called Tehomoth (Pr. 
111. 20), and were believed to communicate through the 
depths of the earth, by means of passages, with the great 
etom which lay' below. In a striking passage in Amos 
v ‘Vt- th f P ro P h et portrays a judgment in which the fire 
ol Jehovah will devour this great water-depth. Within the 
earth itself lay the realm of the departed, Sheol or Hades,” 

the word “ globe ” does not occur in the Bible at all. 




For Young People. 

By Lady Blount and Xavier Field; 

Compiled by Xaxier Field. 

The shoals of nonsensical books (under the name of 
“ Geography ”) which are scattered broadcast in our various 
schools, are purposely written with a view to induce the 
young idea to gradually develop in a globular groove with 
respect to the shape of the earth—the writers saying that the 
earth is a globe whose velocity in its revolution round the 
sun is about 1,000 miles a minute, with a daily “turn-over " 
always going on at the rate of about 1,000 miles an hour; 
and yet, with these two terrific motions going on at the 
same time, the earth appears to be immovable ; in fact, the 
earth is called terra Jirma ; but, though our senses tell us 
that we are standing on the firm and immovable earth, and 
we see the sun and the other orbs in the expanse above us 
moving, they tell us that the earth is “ moving ’’ all the 
time, and that the sun is practically a fixture so far as we 
are concerned. 

Why is this teaching of a globular earth whizzing through 
space believed in by almost everybody? The reply to this 
question appears in the following paragraph :— 

“ Give us the children from their earl)' school age up 
to their teens, and the heretics can have them afterwards.” 

This was said by a well-known Romish priest, who knew,as we 
all know, that the principles imbibed in the education of 
our earliest years are scarcely ever eradicated ; hence it is 
that the theory of a globular and movable earth is drilled 
into a child’s brain before common-sense is developed suffi¬ 
ciently to “ think out ” what has been committed to memory'. 
In after years business cares usually intervene, or youthful 
pursuits are indulged in, and the principles imparted in 
school education are “ taken for granted,” and even the 
studious individual deems it preferable to pursue his self- 
education on the lines of his school education. We have, 
therefore, written this little book, so that, if possible, a child 



may be taught “ common-sense geography,” &c. In this 
book several persons are necessarily brought upon the scene, 
and the youthful pupil cannot but be credited with having 
some knowledge of orthodox school Geography ; but at the 
end of each chapter we give an Explanation of Terms. 

* * * 

* » 

Chapter I.—What is Geography ? 

This question was put to a gentleman, one fine afternoon 
in August, on Brighton Pier, by an intelligent boy about 
ten years of age. The gentleman was evidently in doubt as 
to what reply he should make. As I was sitting near, and 
feeling more than ordinary interest in the subject, I ventured 
for once to dispense with the customary rules of an intro¬ 
duction by introducing myself. The gentleman courteously 
invited me to take part in the conversation. 

I found that the lad’s name was Frank Wilson, and that, 
just before “breaking up” for the summer holiday in a 
London school, his class began the study of Geography ;— 
and now the boy’s favourite uncle George was being ques¬ 
tioned upon the subject. 

I he gentleman remarked that he should feel greatly 
indebted to me if I would enlighten his nephew. Frank 
also joined with his uncle in the request, and without further 
parley I spoke as follows :— 

Geography is a term which is made up of two Greek 
words, the plain English meaning being “ a description of 
the earth.” Geography is therefore that study which deals 
wifh a general description of the earth, its physical 
divisions into mountains, plains, countries, kingdoms, etc., 
sea and land being considered only in respect to the great 
features that have been stamped upon them by the hand of 
God. Strictly speaking, the term Geography should only 
have reference to “a description of the earth,” yet it is the 
custom to include in this teaching some knowledge in respect 
to the firmament, sun, moon, etc. But we have principally 
to do with what is called “ Mathematical Geography,” 
which treats of the earth’s shape and size, and the positions 
of places on its surface. 

Frank.— O Yes, my lady ; my teacher said that a “mathe¬ 
matical fact ” means an exact fact, and, as a fact signifies 



that which really exists, and “ mathematical ” that which can 
be calculated or measured, therefore, that the earth is round 
is a mathematical fact.” 

E.A.M.B.—“ Now, my boy, can you remember how your 
teacher made it clear to you that the earth is round, and 
what sort of roundness he meant? ” 

FRANK.—“ I can remember it quite well—for each of us 
had to take our books and learn off, word for word, what 
was printed.” 

E.A.M.B.—“Would you be kind enough to repeat the 
first paragraph you committed to memory ? ” 

Frank. —“ O, yes. The book said : ‘ The roundness of 
the earth is proved by the appearance of vessels as they 
approach and leave the shore. At a certain distance the 
whole of the vessel is visible ; at a greater distance the hull, 
or body of the vessel cannot be seen ; at a still greater 
distance the topmast only is visible—and, further yet, the 
whole is out of sight. Now, if the earth were flat, the hull 
(being the largest part of the vessel) would remain longest 
visible ; but, as the lower part disappears while the rigging 
is yet to be seen, there must be something coming between 
the eye and the lower part of the vessel, and that something 
is the roundness of the earth. This appearance is similar 
to that of a man going over the top of a hill, where the teet 
are first lost to the spectator, then the body, and at last the 
head. The circumnavigation of the globe (meaning sailing 
round the globe) and the circular shadow which the earth 
always casts on the moon when the moon is eclipsed, are 
other proofs of the earth’s globular form.’ ” 

E.A.M.B.—“ You deserve a prize for the correct way in 
which you have repeated the paragraph in the book. But 
what is the good of your having committed the paragraph to 
memory ? ” 

Frank.—“ Because I shall be able to give a good reason 
to anyone who asks the question : ‘ Flow do you know that 
the earth is a globe?’ ” 

E.A.M.B.—“ But did your teacher say that the earth is a 
perfectly round globe ? ” 

Frank. —“No, my lady. The book says that the exact 
shape of the earth is what is called an oblate spheroid 
oblate meaning ‘extended in front; ’ but the earth differs so 
little from being a perfect sphere (‘ round ) that it is called 



a spheroid. It is much more like a sphere than an orange 
> s —for if an observer could be placed so as to see the whole 
earth, it would appear to him to be perfectly round.” 

E.A.M.B.—“ Now, my boy, as far as I have listened to 
you, I must say I am surprised at the correctness with which 
you have committed your lesson to memory ; and if your 
object is simply to be able to repeat what your teachers give 
you to learn—no matter whether they are fitting you with 
real knowledge, or only fanciful notions—then, I say, go 
on committing to memory whatever they give you to learn. 
What does your uncle think about it ? ” 

UNCLE. —“ Well, your ladyship, I should say that the real 
good to be obtained from the boy going to school is to be 
measured by the real knowledge obtained. Therefore, if 
what has been taught is not true, the sooner he gets to know 
the real facts, the better it will be for him in the future. 
What do you say, Frank ? ” 

(to be continued, D. V.) 


According to recent notices in the daily press, the Nor- 
denskjold Expedition’s steam yacht Antarctic, which left 
Falmouth in October, 1901, for the southern regions, was 
smashed up by the ice on February 12th, 1903. The mem¬ 
bers of the Expedition were fortunately found and rescued 
from Louis Phillipe Island, Graham Land, and Seymour 
Island, farther south, by the Argentine war vessel Uruguay, 
which was especially sent to relieve them. Whether the 
information collected by the explorers will justify the ex¬ 
pense, and the loss and trouble involved, remains to be seen 
when full reports come to hand. 

Many people continue to wonder why valuable lives and 
energy should be risked and wasted in endeavouring to 
reach a questionable point called the South Pole, before 
proper investigation is made, and distances measured of the 
fringes, so to speak, of the Antarctic continent; or before 
the explorers have a more definite knowledge of the true 
superficial shape of the World of land and water. 


t _ 


The attack of the extreme southern regions is most likely 
to continue to end in disappointment, if not death and loss, 
so long as the authorities are wilfully ignorant of the ele¬ 
mentary conditions to be faced. If the steam yacht Antarctic 
had been sent to 55° or 6o° south latitude, and then made a 
true and complete circumnavigation, carefully noting the 
number of miles covered, many think some valuable data 
would have been arrived at. The flora, fauna, geology, 
meteorology, etc., could have been noted during the voyage 
—which should not have to be very extended if the world 
be a globe. At any rate, an important point would be nearer 
settlement, and one more proof would have been demon¬ 
strated, that the world is not a globe. 

Most people know the moral courage required to “go 
back” on oneself, and in effect to eat one’s own words, and 
it is just this that the inner circle of scholastic authorities 
dread to face, as many of them know the world is not a globe, 
but owing to the accumulated heap of so-called Theoretic 
Science of the past three centuries, the present authorities 
are fearful of avowing their better knowledge, and thus make 
a laughing-stock of Newton’s theory, and all the other 
theories which ramify from it, and which are necessary bol¬ 
sters to each other, and to the original theory. Sooner or 
later they know this will have to be faced, and the gigantic 
fraud exposed. 

In conclusion, all Zetetics hope that the British Antarctic 
Expedition under its intrepid leader Capt. Scott, will not 
meet with the fate of the above, but return safely, after col¬ 
lecting some really useful and lasting information, which will 
be of service to future expeditions in these forbidding 


TlIE inspired Psalmist says that “The heavens declare 
the glory of God ; and the firmament showeth his handi¬ 
work ” ; therefore, whatever some professed Christians affirm 
to the contrary, the subject of Creation is connected with 
right views of God, his worship, and his glory. But if we 
would have a right conception of God, and His glory, we 
must see to it that we have a right conception of His works 



in Creation. How, for instance, do we obtain an insight into 
the character of any great man, whether he be a poet, poli¬ 
tician, sculptor, general, or king ? Is it not by his acts, or 
his works ? But suppose these acts, or works, are mis¬ 
represented to us, or defaced by someone, should we not 
have false and distorted views respecting the author, artist, 
or maker of those things ? Assuredly. And so it comes to 
pass in respect to the construction of the world, false views 
have led men into a misconception respecting the Character 
of God, and even alas ! in many cases to the denial of the 
very existence of such a personal being. 


All communications and enquiries respecting this Magazine and the teaching it 
upholds , and all questions and matter for insertion , should be addressed to 
E.A.M.B //, Gloucester Road) Kingston I/ill. 


The Ed. does not necessarily endorse statements made under the headings of' ‘ The 
Earth's Observatory,”. Letters , etc ., unless signed Ed. The Earth. 


Reply to J. Z. W.—Regarding the Standing Order of the House of Commons 
concerning the datum line of Railways, etc., calculations are made in connection 
with the fact that the datum line, to which all elevations and depressions are 
referred, is horizontal , and not an arc of a circle. All great surveys are made 
on this principle. The following extract is given from the Standing Order of 
the Houses of Lords and Commons on Railway Operations, for the Session of 
1862, and published by Vache & Sons, Westminster:— 

“The section shall be drawn to the same horizontal scale as the plan, and. 
to a vertical scale of not less than one inch to every 100 feet ; and shall show 
the surface of the ground marked on the plan, the intended level ot the pro¬ 
posed work, the height of every embankment, and the depth of every cutting, 
and a datum HORIZONTAL LINE, which shall be the same through the whole 
lenght of the work or any branch thereof respective 1 )’, and shall be referred to 
some fixed point*.near either of the termini/’ 


The earth is a plane, the surface centre being immediately underneath the star 
“Polaris.” If at any hour of the night a telescope is lashed to any solid ob¬ 
ject, and turned to the pole-star, it will be found that the star does not maintain 
its exact position, hut seems to slowly rise and fall in the field of view of the 



telescope. The line of sight will rise above it; and about twelve hours 
alter it will be below it. In another 12 hours it will be again above the star. 

All bodies floating in an incompressible medium, such as possibly is the 
subtle matter in which the heavenly bodies are placed, and exposed to atmos¬ 
pheric pressure, fluctuate. 

As to the Pole Star and Sun , take a point in Scotland, equi-distant from the 
North Centre and from the point where the sun is overhead on June 21st, 
mid-day. From that point both the sun and the pole star are seen in a similar 
(or nearly so) altitude; but, according to the figures of the globularists, the 
pole-star is distant—compared to the sun—as 2,000,000 is to I. “Therefore,” 
as a correspondent points out, “ it appears to me that the pole-star should be 
from that point, and indeed from any point in Britain, as if directly overhead, 
IE the globe figures were correct.” 

As a matter of fact the motion of the sun is a visible reality, and the sun’s 
path expands and contracts daily for six months alternately ; the sun in its path 
from 21st June daily expanding until December 21st, after which the path grad¬ 
ually contracts. Therefore, however the pole-star, as compared with the sun’s 
position at a given point on June 21st, the position varies in regard to other 
points ; but if the earth were a globe tearing and rushing through space in the 
manner described by our modern scientists, and the Sun a Fixture , the position 
of the sun in respect to the pole-star and any point in Britain would not prac¬ 
tically vary. The fact of the sun and pole-star being seen at a nearly similar 
altitude, is a demonstrable proof that the differentiation in the altitudes of the 
sun and pole-star is not immeasurably great; instead of being two millions to 
one we may strike out the millions and replace them by hundreds—and proba¬ 
bly we shall then be “stretching a point” in regard to the actual distance of 
the sun away from the pole-star. We may also take it for granted that the sun 
is a comparatively small body.. 


We are asked if the Southern Cross is seen from Japan. Well, we can only 
state accounts differ regarding this ; Humboldt did not see it until he was in 
lat. 16 S, and then he states : “ it was strongly inclined ; ” showing that it was 
rising in the east, and sharing in the general sweep of the star-. Some observers 
have told us it was not visible until they arrived in latitudes 8, 14, and 16 S ; 
and others have assured us that the Southern Cross is visible from Japan ; and 
amongst the latter is our esteemed friend Mr. E. Middleton, therefore I 
feel convinced that it is a fact.—Ed. 

“‘The Earth,’ a magazine, published at 11, Gloucester Road, Kingston, 
Surrey, having for its useless object the absurd astronomy to be found in the 
Semitic writing known as Genesis.” 

The above, from Reynolds' Newspaper , July 19th, 1903, refers to the fact 
that The Earth's teaching is founded upon the Bible, and we doubt not that 
“ floods ” of opposition from the world, including such publications as Reynolds' 
Newspaper , and The Clarion may “ beat upon ” The Earth without the slightest 
ill effect, for its teaching is “founded upon the Rock” of Truth ! 

Re THE MIDNIGHT SUN.—“ I may say with some confidence, that though 
it may cause some extra tiouble , it will in reality afford an extra proof that the 
earth is not a globe , and must be flat or the Midnight Sun could not be seen at 
all. I am, faithfully, E. E. MIDDLETON.” 




A Lecture by Lady Blount. 


It is customary for writers on science to complain that the religious section 
of the public have hitherto been inclined to obstruct independent investigations 
of natural phenomena; and they say, moreover, that religious objections have 
now been completely silenced. In other words, it is now assumed that the 
philosophy which dispenses with the idea of a God, is now in possession of the 
whole field of science ; and thus all who accept the Holy Scriptures as reliable 
are placed on the horns of a very awkward dilemma. 

I am not myself so constituted that I can accept two contrary propositions, 
and pretend to believe them both, after the style of a modern antinomian, and 
therefore, I am prepared to show my colours at once, and to agree to the state¬ 
ments made by Thomas Paine and Robert Ingersoll, to the effect that it is not 
logical to accept the theories of modern astronomers, and at the same time to 
profess anything more than a very qualified belief, either in the Old or New 
Testaments, as we have them in the collection of books which we call “The 
Bible,” In other words, I prefer the prophet Enoch to Laplace ; Moses to 
Lyell; and the Books of Joshua and Job to the so-called “ laws ” of Copernicus 
and Sir Isaac Newton. Nor in saying this do I wish to diminish the just fame 
of the latter great philosopher. He made as good guesses as he could ; but he 
had the honesty to say that he could not prove them by natural facts visible to 
all men. He only claimed that they fitted better in with what had been up to 
his time observed, than any explanations previously put forward. This is, of 
course, a reasonable statement, even when the thing claimed is open to contro¬ 
versy ; but modern Newtonians are by no means so modest, as they always claim 
that all the “laws” of Newton have been proved so completely that they are 
to be put above Divine Revelation itself, should any statements made therein 
clash with his ideas. 

With men like Sir Robert Ball, Mr. Blatchford, or the Editor of The Agnostic 
I join issue, and say, with Lady Blount, that the Newtonian theory is still un¬ 
proved, as various statements made not only remain unproved but are actually 
contradicted by everyday experience and the evidence of our senses. The modern 
Darwinian does the same thing in other departments a> the Newtonian in rela¬ 
tion to light and the laws ot motion, and so we have a multitude of writers all 
eager for having the glory of getting rid of design in the constitution of Nature, 
h or my part 1 should as soon believe in astrology as in the boastings of some of 
these modern prophets, as I observe that they always reason in a circle, and use 
magniloquent phrases which convey the ideas that matter arranges itself, that 
motion originates and sustains itself; that organization designs itself; and that 
beauty and harmony are the result of a fortuitous concourse of atoms. Such 
men as Haeckel and Buchner seem deficient even in the sense of humour, or they 
would not talk as they do about physical tendencies and “ natural selection.” 

Dr. Wallace is a man of a different stamp ; and, like Voltaire and Bolingbroke, 
deserves different treatment. He has also given many proofs of independence of 
mind and personal integrity, all of which make us welcome the help his new 
views are likely to give us in getting rid of what Humboldt called “a univer¬ 
sally difftised delirium of lunatics.” It used to he said that “the undevout 
astronomer was mad ; ” but now every student of natural philosophy will find 
some difficulty in combining any degree of devoutness with the acceptance of 
received opinions. In the year 1854, a professor at Cambridge, the Rev. Dr. 
Whewell, (no mean authority), published a book called The Plurality of Worlds , 
in which the views put forward corresponded in many respects with those now- 
advocated by Dr. A. Russell Wallace, in his recent volume on Man's Place in 
The Universe. He was a professed believer in Revelation, which I understand 
Dr. Wallace is not; but both are good scholars and honest men, and have done 
something to knock the bottom out of a grotesque superstition—for which we 


thank them. Another honest, but misguided, opponent is to be found in Dr. 
Draper, of New York, who published, in 1876, a work called The Conflict 
Between Religion and Science , in which he makes Bruno fall a victim to hatred 
of science (which I believe is wrong history) and also parades all the so-called 
sciences as antagonistic to Revealed Religion. 

The tide, however, is now beginning to turn, and we have discoveries in con¬ 
nection with the new metal, Radium, upsetting our notions as to the nature of 
force. We have men doubting the existence of a something called Ether, per¬ 
vading all space. We have the daily papers joking about the stage tricks played 
By means of Foucault’s pendulum. We have also a Message from Mars put 
on the stage, as a play. And to crown all, we have photographs illustrating 
Jules Verne’s Journey to the Moon , on exhibition at the Crystal Palace. Perhaps 
a little later on we shall have some new Shakespeare taking his cue from Lady 
Blount’s lecture, and poking fun at the absurdities of globes spinning round, 
whilst the oceans, supposed to exist on their surfaces, have no tendency to act 
like the water scattered by a grindstone. For myself, I am only a captious 
critic ; I assert little, and believe less in relation to matters not revealed to us 
by God, or within the possibility of our knowledge. I, therefore, beg at once 
to give way to Lady Blount, who has strong convictions, for which she is 
prepared to give reasons of a convincing character. 

[The various newspaper reports, and correspondence, in connection with the 
many lectures, in different parts of England, which have been given by the Ed. 
since sending out the last issue of The Earth , including a long report of the 
last of the lectures which the Ed. has given at the Y.M.C.A., by its reporter— 
Mr. A. H. Johnson—and for which I thank him very earnestly, are unavoidably 
held over for a future issue.] 

[The whole of the Ed.’s extensive correspondence with the Isle of Wight 
Guardian , and The Echo , will shortly be published, D.V.] 


Tell Jesus , weary heart, 

Tell Him what weighs thee down ; 

And seek His grace—to bear the Cross , 
That must precede the Crown. 

Tell Jesus , weeping one, 

He’ll listen to thy cry ; 

He counteth all thy falling tears, 

And knows each heaving sigh. 

W. J. YOUNG (bedridden). 


Tell Jesus , anxious soul—- 
Lay at His feet thy care ; 

He, too, has suffered here below, 
And sought relief, by prayer. 

Tell Jesus , tell Him all, 

In confidential love ; 

And He, in answer to your prayers, 
His faithfulness will prove . 

Composed during quiet moments.) 



Dear Madam,—I should like to have one more word with Mr. H. J. Young 



lie says that my quotation from Mr. W. Winckler is not opposed to the 
41 globular” theory. For my own part I think it is. If the curvature exist it 
would certainly be found in levelling operations, and would consequently have 
to be allowed for. According to his theory, levelling operations are a series 
of straight lines and angles—the longer the straight line the more acute the 
angle {see diagram). 

Can friend Young inform me who has proved the earth to-be a globe, and 
what was his proof? Astronomers are the men who have assumed it, but they 
offer no proof. They say that the hypothesis need not be true, or even prob¬ 
able ; it is sufficient that they lead to results of calculation that agree with 
calculation. Would Mr. Young agree to have his work proved on these lines ? 

We have two of the most simple and true proofs of the earth being a plane 
—the plummet and spirit level,—but we are taught not to believe our own 
sight and senses, but to imagine that there is some magnetic influence at work 
that cannot be proved or explained, causing them to point to the centre ol a 
big globe, because certain scientists have assumed that such is the case. It is 
like getting a clocksmith to tell a farmer his work. Practical men work on a 
plane earth, and work according to that fact ; while astronomers assume it is a 
globe, and try to find one set of rules to allow for the supposed curvature and 
another to eliminate it. 

Crockham Hill. C. RHYS EVANS. 

CSNTue 0* 


Earth .—“Your ladyship will, I feel sure, corroborate my opinion, viz. : that all 
readers of The Earth would like to know what is beyond the southern ice-bound 
barriers ; but, as your ladyship truly remaiks, IF God has willed that men shall 
not pass over these barriers, then the Discovery expedition, and all similar ex¬ 
peditions, must end in failure. These barriers, the mystery of 4 The Great 
Beyond, 5 and the laws governing the sun’s course, may belong to the Arcana of 
God alone. My reason for writing this letter was not so much to mention the 
above, as to point out that we have a sure Guide in the Bible—and knowing, 
as I do the immense advantage it gives to the earnest student of the Word of 
God to be able to read the Greek Testament—it has therefore afforded me great 
pleasure to impart to your ladyship some knowledge of Greek, and the way in 
which it is built up as a language. I fully believe that Greek was specially 
chosen by God for continuing the developed teachings of the Old Testament 
into the New. No other language but the Greek so “lays hold of ” the root 
ideas of the Hebrew. In both languages words have defined root significations 
from which differentiations spread out by natural sequence. The duplication 
of syllables, and even triplication of words, intensify the meaning ; for instance, 
when speaking of the Supreme—the God of all the earth—by His Holy Name, 
the term is thrice repeated : “ Holy, Holy, Holy.” Trinitarians, in seeking for 



a basis on which to formulate their paganized triad, have taken this triplication 
to signify “ Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,”—each being “the only Immortal,” 
and each co-equal with the other from all eternity. Again : the term for “per¬ 
fect,” in the Greek, is from the same root as “ end” (telos); “ perfect ” : teleios , 
“perfect.” Perfection, therefore, when taken with the context, implies “con¬ 
tinuing to the end.” Teleioi , of Phil. iii. 15, signifies “relatively perfect”— 
not so far advanced as the teteleiomai in verse 12. 

In closing, permit me to say that, whilst you admit, as I do, Greek to be the 
language for the students of the New Testament, yet Latin has its uses, and 
your acceptance of my efforts to enable you to know more of Latin is gratifying. 


[Divinely charged with mystery are many things which we behold in this vast 
universe—for example : even the growth of a single blade of grass 1 And 
that God often “works in a mysterious way,” we cannot fail to perceive, also 
that-He, as yet, has not seen fit to unveil all His divine mysteries.—Ed,] 


44 1 might say that I experienced one of the greatest joys of my life, when 
my eyes alighted on your magazine in a newsagent’s window.” 

“ In the number of The Earthy for the year now fast closing, I should like, 
with your permission, to express my thanks, with those of others, for your un¬ 
tiring efforts to extend a better knowledge of the Cosmogony of the earth, in 
so far as it has been revealed to us children of men. Hypothesis and assump¬ 
tion prove nothing, and are valueless. The teaching of the Word of God con¬ 
cerning His Creation has to be accepted with the same faith as that of His 
Redemptive Work, by His Son, and Sanctification by His Spirit, This is surely 
the basis of our belief, the details being made clearer to our minds as we journey 
on. At the best, our knowledge is only “in part.” No profession of skill, 
where real science is necessarily employed, accepts assumptions excepting, 
apparently, modern astronomy, and why this should be so is not far to discover. 

“ Most useful and interesting matter has been presented in the current vol. 
of The Earth , and I sincerely trust that the new vol. will be enriched with 
deeper knowledge, great encouragement to yourself, and all to the Glory of God.” 

E. ARMSTRONG, Maj.-Gen. 

Woodvilie North, South Australia. Aug, 26, 1903, 

“ Yours of July 18th came duly to hand, and in reply would say, Adelaide is 
lat. 35 south ; longilude 138-50 east, or thereabouts. If, at noonday, I stand 
with my hack to the North and face to the South, at present season, the sun 
would be nearly overhead, but slightly behind me, i.e., whatever shadow I made 
would he in front or to the south of me. Sun-rising, or east, would be on my 
left hand, but slightly behind, or, as a soldier would say, a trifle to mv left rear ; 
while sun-setting would, of course, be slightly to the right rear, or westward. 
At Midsummer, say 21st December, sunrise would, were I still standing in the 
same position, be slightly to my left front, and setting to the right front, while 
there would be a very short shadow behind me at noonday. 

I have never been so far south as the 45th parallel, but can safely say that 
your informant was correct, i.e., that a person standing with his face to the 
north would see the sun (high up) in front of him ; while sunrising, or east, 
would he on his right front, and sun-s-elting on his left front, but not very much 
to the front in either case. 

“ I notice bv the cablegrams that you are having a very unusually wet summer, 
and only wish it could l>e transferred to our dry northern areas in the interior 


of Australia ; the benefit would be incalculable for it is years since they had 
a really good downpour in that country, although this year has been better in 
that respect than the previous six or seven. Trusting this will find you in good 
health and strength for the carrying on of your great work, and that this reply 
will be of use to you.”—F.H. 

A Composition by the Ed., entitled “The Visions Past,” is being performed 
nightly by Moore & Burgess’ Minstrels, at St. James’ Hall, Piccadilly. The 
words and music, by the Ed., are exquisitely rendered by Mr. Dredge, and ac¬ 
companied upon the harp by Mr. John Francis—who has arranged a charming 
accompaniment to the melody. Many congratulations has the Ed. received 
upon the successful reception of her song - ; and the following letter from her 
dear friend, Mrs. Zippora Monteith Fischel—who has a magnificent voice herself, 
—is valued very greatly, 

f)4, Finborough Road, S.W. Dec. 9th, 1903. 

Dear Lady Blount,—It was a great pleasure to see you last night, and I 
wanted my husband to meet you. We both congratulate you on the great su cess 
of your beautiful song—it decidedly made the greatest success of the whole 
evening—and did you notice the remarkable applause after 1st verse. Our friend 
Mr. Mapleson, who sat across from us, is the king’s librarian of music, thought 
it a very pretty song—and a good song—and applauded it heartily. 



Owing to mis-translation, by the printer, of my shorthand, several errors were 
printed on pp. 290 and 291 of last issue.—Ed. 

Page 291, para. 2.—This should not have appeared in that position, the question 
being answered further down on the page. 

Page 291, para. 6.—For “Light and heat radiate equally in all directions,” 
read: But light and heat radiate equally in all directions over short dis¬ 
tances, <SlC. 

Page 291, para. 6. line 3.—For “ 20 degrees,” read : 23J degrees. 

Page 291, para. 8.—For the three first lines, read : Why is it the sun is not 
visible all the night, especially as its light is so much greater than the stars ? 
A ns .—Because as the sun recedes from us its light strikes our atmosphere 
at a greater angle, and its rays are refracted from us, and the light does not 
pierce to the ground. This is why the sun is not visible at night. bor a 
similar reason the stars could not be visible for a period longer than the 
sun is visible. That the foregoing explanation is comet, is proved by the 
fact that the sun is visible the whole 24 hours ol the day, in the Arctic 
regions, when its path has so contracted, and the area wit! in its circle is so 
diminished, that it remains in view (within this region) for several months, 
without selling ; this has been recorded more than, &c. 

Page 292, 22nd line.—Read : light cannot teach over more than about one ha3f 
of the earth. See. 



By Lady Blount. 

“ What shall it pioftt a man if he gain the whole world , and lose his own soul" 
(life )—Mark viii., 36. 

Nothing worth caring for, 
Under the sun, 

As ortward we journey, 

If Life’s race is run, 
Without God, 

Without Hope, 

Without Life. 

Nothing worth trusting in 
All the world o’er, 

In might or in grandeur, 
From shore unto shore ; 
But in Thee, 

Maker, God— 

But in Thee. 

Nothing worth toiling for, 
Not for a day, 

Unless with a glad heart 
We truly can sav 
Unto Thee, 

Oh, our God, 

Unto Thee. 

Nothing worth living for, 
Even an hour, 

Unless in our Fortress, our 
Stronghold, our Tower, 
We have Thee, 

Jesus the Christ, 

We have Thee. 

Nothing worth dreaming, 

By day or by night, 
Unless our thoughts mingle, 
In sweetest delight 
In Wisdom, 

Divine Love 
And Truth. 

Nothing wortli boasting of, 
E'en in the least; 

Man being mortal, 

As even the beast; 
Without Christ, 
Without Hope, 

Without Life. 

Nothing worth reading but 
God’s blessed Book, 
Which tells us through Jesus 
For life we must look— 
Jesus, the Christ, 

Word made flesh, 

Son of God. 

Nothing worth talking of, 
Even a word, 

If not to the glory 
Of Him who averred, 
Every man 
Will be judged 
By itis words. 

Nothing remaineth— 

From all we must part; 

Nothing worth loving— 
Soul, body, and heart, ; 
But in Thee 
But in Thee. 

Nothing is worthy of 
Even a glance ; 

Unless we remember 

That nought came by chance 
But was made 
By the Word 
Of our God. 

No earth-sea hall whirling, 
Through ‘space’ in the sky 

But one world with heaven 
Exalted on high ; 

Water level 
Earth a plane , 

Makes all plain. 

All that’s opposed 
ToGod’sword, isbut waste 

Which firm as the earth’s deep 
Foundations is based 
On “ pillars ” 

“ Unmoveable ” 

And “fixed.” 

No pagan perplexity,* 

Of three Gtds in one— 

The mighty Jehovah, 

And Jesus His Sou, 

The only 

The Lamb. 

One Holy Agent—the 
Spirit of God ; 

His people to guide, love, 
Comfort, afford ; 

Peace of God, 

Holy Ghost, 

•The teaching in the doctrine termed “The Blessed Trinity,” is (to say the 
least) very confusing—causing a violent collision, or opposition in the mind, and 
decidedly injurious to the young and tile weal; minded. 




II e have much pleasure in recommending the aboite work. 

I he bQoklet contains the three thousand words, and idioms, 
which are most used in ordinary conversation ; sufficient to 
enable you to talk French all your life : no fossil philological 
peculiarities, but Prench as it is actually spoken in France. 
Grammar underlies each group of examples, and we think 
this a cleverly condensed method of teaching the French 


The Author of French in Three Months also gi\es Lessons 
in Conversational French to adults, at 




Friends of the Ed. of this Magazine can testify to his ability 
and agreeable way of teaching. 

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co., 


22, Budge Row. Cannon Street, 


Price of Appliances £1 Is., £2 2s., & £3 3s. 

Instalments may be arranged. 



Nos. 43 


& 44. 



Remarks upon “The Views of Modern Science” 
(A pamphlet by Rev. G. T. Manley, M.A.) 

The above pamphlet is evidently written in defence of 
modern science. 

After quoting the names of its founders, which include 
Newton, Herschel, Professor Adams, Clerk, Maxwell, Boyle, 
Wallace, Darwin, Sir James Simpson, Prof. Adam Sedgwick, 
Young, Joule, and Faraday, the writer makes a neat apology 
at the bottom of the page—as a footnote—for not including 
those of Huxley and Tyndall, 

However, he regards Faraday, Young, and Joule—as 
physicists—to be superior to Tyndall : and Darwin—as a 
biologist—preferable to Huxley. And the “conclusion” of 
the whole matter may be comprehended by critics for the truth 
when they consider the writer’s summing up, viz: that “all 
points to one conclusion, that the functions of science (i.e., 
human “science”) and Christianity are to purify each 
other ” (!). 

I can only express my regret when I see such words as 
these in print ; and the only charitable excuse for the one 
who penned them—impossible as it may seem—is that he 
must be ignorant of many of the tenets of both the Bible 
and modern science, otherwise he could hardly' make such 
a statement. 

But God has shown that THE WORSHIP OF HUMAN 
INTELLECT MUST CEASE. Human intellect is one of 
Satan’s most seductive idols, but the time has arrived when 
it must fall. And the redeemed will be delivered from its 

Mr. Manley quotes the following words (which are the 



li e have much pleasure in recommending the above work. 

I lie booklet contains the three thousand words, and idioms, 
which are most used in ordinary conversation ; sufficient to 
enable you to talk French all your life : no fossil philological 
peculiarities, but French as it is actually spoken in France. 
Grammar underlies each group of examples, and we think 
this a cleverly condensed method of teaching the French 


1 he Author of French in Three Months also gnes Lessons 
in Conversational French to adults, at 




Friends of the Ed. of this Magazine can testify to his ability 
and agreeable way of teaching. 

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co., 


22, Budge Row, Cannon Street, 


Price of Appliances £1 Is., £2 2s., k £3 3s. 

Instalments may be arranged. 



NOS. 43 & 44. 




Remarks upon “ The Views of Modern Science ” 
(A pamphlet by Rev. G. T. Manley, M.A.) 

The above pamphlet is evidently written in defence of 
modern science. 

After quoting the names of its founders, which include 
Newton, Herschel, Professor Adams, Clerk, Maxwell, Boyle, 
Wallace, Darwin, Sir James Simpson, Prof. Adam Sedgwick, 
Young, Joule, and Faraday, the writer makes a neat apology 
at the bottom of the page—as a footnote—for not including 
those of Huxley and Tyndall, 

However, he regards Faraday, Young, and Joule—as 
physicists—to be superior to Tyndall : and Darwin—as a 
biologist—preferable to Huxley. And the “ conclusion’’ of 
the whole matter may be comprehended by critics for the truth 
when they consider the writer’s summing up, viz: that “all 
points to one conclusion, that the functions of science (i.e., 
human “ science ”) and Christianity are to purify each 
other ” (!). 

I can only express my regret when I see such words as 
these in print; and the only charitable excuse for the one 
who penned them—impossible as it may seem—is that he 
must be ignorant of many of the tenets of both the Bible 
and modern science, otherwise he could hardly' make such 
a statement. 

But God has shown that THE WORSHIP OF HUMAN 
INTELLECT MUST CEASE. Human intellect is one of 
Satan’s most seductive idols, but the time has arrived when 
it must fall. And the redeemed will be delivered from its 

Mr. Manley quotes the following words (which are the 


words of some individual) quoted by Bishop Butler in his 
Analogy of Religion : “ Christianity is not so much as a sub¬ 
ject of enquiry.but it is now discovered to be fiction.” 

Mr. M. then endeavours to prove therefrom, that because 
infidelity existed in 1736, “ before a word of modern science 
had been written,” therefore it is not a cause for the present 
prevailing infidelity. 

In upholding his position, the writer, after saying, “ I do 
not think the state of Christianity so black to-day,” asks this 
question : “ If science is the cause of unbelief at the close of 
the nineteenth century, what was its cause at the commence¬ 
ment ol the eighteenth ? ” But there is no argument here. 
It is about level with the contention that as before a certain 
disease was known in a particular country where people had 
suffered and died, therefore it was proven that since it (i.e. 
the new disease) appeared, it could neither be the cause of 
injury nor death. 

The one line of argument is as sensible as the other. It 
must be apparent that before a thing exists it cannot affect 
anything. Therefore, before modern science existed it could 
not have caused infidelity. But now that IT DOES EXIST it 
is not the only cause for unbelief in the Word of God, and 
the teachings of His Son, Jesus Christ; nevertheless, it is 
an additional and powerful cause, and its evil influence 
operates upon two classes, viz. : those who understand 
something about its tenets, and those who know nothing 
about them, but accept the conclusions of those that do. 

Apart from the lines of Truth no man can form satisfactory 
judgment on anything. The majority of people understand 
little about modern science, nor do they trouble 
TrU Ke' S of C to understand the truth of the Bible. There- 
Knowledge. fore they do not know where to set the dividing 
line between true science, and that which is 
described in Holy Writ as “science—falsely so-called.” Only 
the measuring rod of truth, prayerfully sought after and 
sought out, can rightly divide these two. 

Very many professing Christians go on in a sort of 
“ follow-my-leader ” style, never dreaming that they are 
professing to have faith in two systems which contradict each 
other, and which if understood could not be held together 
in a reasonable mind. How can a man believe a thing he 
does not understand ? It is impossible. If a man believes 



in another man’s teaching without understanding it, or 
proving it to be true, his faith is centred in the reliability of 
another man’s conclusions, but not in a thing which he does 
not understand. 

No ! Modern Scripture-contradicting science is not the 
only cause for infidelity, but it is an additional and a power¬ 
ful cause, and it appears evident to me that its interpolation 
is the policy of Satan, and his evil instruments, who, although 
invisible are only so in substance but not in force of evil 
influence and rule. And thus Satan has retarded the pro¬ 
gress and salvation of mankind, by shaking men’s faith in 
God’s Word, and in the Creator’s own account of His Cre¬ 
ation as set forth therein. 

I expressed this opinion in an allegorical figure about ten 
years ago, in my book entitled, Adrian Galilio ,a song-writer’s 
story. The stanzas I refer to, which portray Satan, as “the 
the prince of Hades,” conversing with one of his evil instru¬ 
ments—the “ Spirit-Jester ”—are as follows :— 

Prince. —Why, Jester, laughing still as ever! 

Jester. —\’ m mimicking mankind so clever ! 

Prince. — I hate them for their power of will, 

To change their minds, or hold them still ! 

Jester. —Describe thy plans, detail each stage 
For snaring man in Christian age ? 

Prince. —First, far and wide, shall rise division. 

To fog’s man’s senses, cause derision. 

Then strong conceit shall fast increase, 

A trap affording no relief. 

This spirit, holding men so neat, 

Will raise a sect in every street. 

For plain I see, through spirit source, 

A battle-field right down time’s course; 

Till the Angel shall the decree enforce, 

That “ Time shall be no more.” 

Prince. —Against their Maker men shall turn, 

And strong “delusion ” Truth shall spurn ; 

For this well focussed, and compact, 

Imprints untruth as solid fact. 

Spirits prepared throughout the ages, 


Shall do our will at fitting stages ; 

Man’s word ’gainst God’s shall be accepted, 
And false Cosmogony erected ; 

That earth’s a tiny whirling globe 
Shall men set forth in learned robe ; 

Above concern if Moses erred, 

And Jesus verified his word— 

Denying the earth’s Creator. 

Jester. —Stay, Prince, observe before Time’s closed, 
Our mighty will shall be opposed ; 

Sneer not at the Zetetic band, 

Goliath fell by David’s hand. 

I see a Stone ; it taketh aim ; 

And hush, I hear its curious strain : 

Hypothesis quoted— 

“All matter once floated 
In atoms wide roaming through space ; ” 

When a power, perhaps “Nether”? 

Pulled all down together; 

IIow it happened no mortal can trace ! 

But, dear me ! however 

Could there then be a “ Nether ” ? 

Or an upward or do7vmuard at all ? 

Witli “atoms” dis-severed, 

Now gravity-tethered, 

And shooting through space like a ball. 

This power of such fame, 

“ Gravitation ” by name, 

Pounced down on the atoms while strewing; 

But further back gaze, 

O’er eternity’s maze, 

What before was good gravity doing ? 

The gravity theory. 

When started, was clearly 
A fancy which Newton had “ run ” ; 

Imagine the notion— 

This world, mostly ocean, 

Once a cinder shot out from the sun ! 

Like Solar relation 
Inherent rotation 

Sent the “ globe” whirling round, till full 

Just picture the view— 

The sparks, how they flew ! 

And a beauty so bright made the moon ! 

The Sun, the great “ Master,” 

Sure, ought to go faster 
Than the sparks it sent backward reviewing; 

Vet globe and moon, too. 

Keep old Sol well in view, 

And play all around while pursuing ! 


The Globite avers 
It took millions of yecos 
For the earth to develop and cool. Sir ; 

But he who will try 
To give God the lie, 

Shall yet prove himself Satan’s tool, Sir. 

Jester. —Truth-Seekers are but deemed fanatics, 

For at the “Truth” the masses laugh! 

Hear how they shout with addled brain, 

“ It’s nought to me if earth’s a plane, 

Or whirling globe, its all the same.” 

Modern science is enveloped about in folds of not com¬ 
monly understood wordiology. The newest 
Scientific work on modern science, entitled : Man’s 
jargon. Place in the Universe , by Prof. Alfred Wallace, 
is not exempt from the unseemly drapery of 
scientific jargon : in fact it is pretty freely padded with it. 
Put is this scientific jargon knowledge? Nay, it is as con¬ 
ventional in its nature as are all other man-made con¬ 
ventionalities and fashions. 


“ New PLANETS. —Professor Max Wrlf announces the dis¬ 
covery of five new small planets, at Kcnigstuhl, Heidelburg ; 
one on the 29th April, three on the 7th May, and one on the 
1 ith. The last he thought might be identical with No. 469, 
which was discovered on February 13th, 1901, but, accord¬ 
ing to Professor Bauschinger, their identity is not probable. 
The first three of the above planets were photographed by 
Professor Wolf himself, the other two by Dr. Camera. 

“ Three new variable stars have been discovered in the 
course of the measurements for the astrographic catalogue 
at the Royal Observatory, Greenwich ; two in the constell¬ 
ation Draco, and one in Camelopardalis, so that they will 
be reckoned as 6, 1902, Draconis ; 7 > I 9 ° 2 > Draconis ; and 
8, 1902, Camelopardalis.” 


man’s place in the universe. 

By the above announcement in a “ largest-circulation" daily 
paper of June loth, under the heading of ‘‘Science,” the 
public gain absolutely nothing. By it, however, a few gen¬ 
tlemen, calling themselves “ professors,” are advertised as 
doing something, the value of which to mankind may be 
reckoned at nil. 

But there are other sides to this matter (if the professors 
do not live entirely on thin air, or perform their professing 
gratis), and one is, that the people are mulcted of funds, and 
their minds be-muddled in order that a select circle of pro¬ 
fessorial star-finders should be employed at their mind- 
befogging pastime. 

If a thousandth pait of the funds and time now lavished 
on such operations was devoted to informing the people as 
to the True Shape of the World in which they live, there 
would be less ground for complaint: and common-sense 
thinkers would multiply, who would be in a better position to 
approximate these belauded professors, and their work at 
its true value. At present the Plane World has sufficient 
camels, if not dragons, without retaining so-called professors 
to add to those already tacked-on in name to the beautiful 
luminaries of the sky. The human race would not be ben- 
fited in the least were the professors to profess they had 
located, and named in the sky, whole flocks of camels, or 
more whimsical objects. 



A Song on the Globular Universe, or “Globe” 
On the Brain ! 

I’ve just had a look 
At W’s book, 

So its bearings, in song, I’ll define, 

P'or my thoughts go and come 
In rhymerie’s run, 

As I step on the critical line. 

Refrain —Sir Isaac went far 
Beyond reason’s bar 

When he floated the theory that the earth was a star; 



And the same evil blut 
Mr. W’s got 
In his universe pot 

For he starts with a globe, thus assuming the lot! 

Some scientists shirk 
Certain truths in their work, 

But here there are palpable reasons 
P'or thinking our earth 
Is the only one worth 
Populating—because it has seasons. 

We make no dissension 
With this main contention 
Because it seems valid, and clear ; 

So with Wallace we own 
The Earth’s peopled alone, 

—But no man can prove it’s a sphere! 

This writer’s resolved 
“ All that is ” is evolved, 

No matter what Matter’s the cause ; 

So plainly we see 
He and Haeckel agree, 

That Matter makes Matter’s own laws! 

And instead of Genesis 
They’ve got “ Abiogenesis,” 

—A wonderful compound, this word— 

They want “ life without life ” 

In matter full rife ; 

Thus denying all life’s from the Lord. 

Suns, counting “millions” 

And stars too in “ billions,” 

P'ormed themselves—so they say—right away, 
And whirling by chance 
A sidereal dance 

They rush round in a-maze-(ing) array. 

If VV is right 

We must doubt our own sight 
While our sense and our reason resolves 
These “ professors ” say it’s clear 
Heavenly bodies “ appear 

To move,” but “ it’s the earth that revolves ! ” 




“False science” ignores 

God’s Word, and His Laws 

It denies that our God did “ make man ” ; 

But “ man’s place” we rehearse 
“ In the true Universe” 

Is to work out “ His will on His plan.” 

In nebular fiction 
There’s much contradiction, 

The Scriptures it sets at defiance; 

So we’ll stand by the Bible 
And spurn every libel 
Against its true cosmical science. 

So Christian be wise 

And from slumber arise 

Christ’s soldiers should stand up and fight 

In strongest accord 

For the Word of the Lord, 

Clad in armour of Truth and of Right. 

But I fear that my song 
May be tedious and long. 

With apologies, dear reader, to you, 

This lyric I’ll close 
And finish in prose 
The rest of my Wallace Review. 

I have noticed that though in Mr. Wallace’s book he 
goes contrary to some astronomical teachings, he yet en¬ 
dorses the theories which underlie the very foundation of 
modern astronomy. I will give a few quotations from his 
book, showing the nature of some of the theories still taught 
by scientific authorities. 

My readers will understand that light is supposed to con¬ 
sist of the wave-vibrations of ether : and scientists are sup¬ 
posed to have measured the length of these wave-vibrations, 
as also their velocities. Hence we read on p. 27 : 

“By ingenious experiments the size and rate of vibration of these 
waves have been measured, and it is found that they vary considerably. 
Those forming the red light, which is least refracted, having a wave 
length of about 1 three-hundred-and-twenty-six-thousandth of an inch, 
while the violet rays at the other end of the spectrum are only about 
half that length,or 1 six-hundred-and-thirty-thousanith part of an inch.” 


The rate at which vibrations succeed each other is from 302 
millions of millions per second for the extreme red rays, to 
737 millions of millions for those at the violet end of the 

The new astronomy is generally based on deductions 
drawn from these theories about light, and light waves ; 
but when they talk of “millions of millions” of vibrations 
in a second of time, the ordinary mind is fairly bewildered ! 

Again, we find that the Copernican theory of the world 
was not generally accepted at first, the objectors saying :■—- 
“ If the earth revolves round the sun at a distance which 
cannot be less according to Kepler’s measurement of the 
distance of Mars at opposition than 13J millions of miles, 
then how is it that the nearer stars are not seen to shift their 
apparent places when viewed from opposite sides of this 
enormous orbit ? ” 

Of course the usual assumptions were made to overcome 
this difficulty ; namely, that the stars we look at are such an 
immense distance from us. But as the writer of the book 
under consideration adds :—“This seemed wholly incredible 
even to the great observer Tycho Brahe, and hence the 
Copernican theory was not so generally accepted as it other¬ 
wise would have been.” 

It is instructive to notice that the sun’s distance was then 
supposed to be 13^ millions of millions of miles, whereas we 
read: “it is now pretty well fixed at about 92,780,000”! 
This is rather a large difference of opinion, or measure¬ 
ment (?) for an “ exact science.” But it is noticeable that 
however many mistaken guesses the astronomers make, their 
teachings are always supposed to be “ scientific ” ! 

In this case even their mistakes must be “ scientific ’’ also, 
that is, they are “ scientific mistakes ” ! We notice, further, 
that Mr. Wallace bases all his speculations on the theory 
of evolution or development: and this theory of development 
or evolution is based on the globular theory ; the former 
explanation being the expansion, as it were, of the latter. 
This theory of evolution contradicts the very first chapter 
of Genesis, as also the Fourth Commandment, in which the 
Creator tells us that he made the World in six literal days 
like the Sabbath or Seventh Day. But science, of course, 
knows of no beginning, as is confessed on p. 134 of Mr. 
Wallace’s book. He says : 


man’s place in the universe. 

“ It cannot be too often repeated that no explanation; no theory ; 
can ever take us to the beginning of things, but only one or two steps 
at a time into the dim past, which may enable us to comprehend, 
however imperfectly, the processes by which the world or the universe 
as it is, has been developed out of some earlier and simpler condition.” 

So it appears after all that scientists know nothing 
of the beginning of the world. Thus we see why those who 
reject the inspired account of Creation, as given in the Word 
of God, have not only nothing better to offer us in its place ; 
but positively have to confess that they do not know, and 
cannot reasonably speculate as to how the world or the uni¬ 
verse first began. Then why do they reject or ignore the 
inspired account ? Simply because that account is dia¬ 
metrically opposed to their vain imaginations ; and in ad¬ 
mitting that account, they would have to admit an all- 
powerful personal and all-wise Creator. However, there is 
one conclusion to which Professor Wallace comes, with which 
Zetetics will readily agree—in fact it is his main contention, 
—namely, that this is the only habitable world, as far as 
can be known to science. This is quite contrary to the 
popular astronomical conclusions. 

Something, therefore, is gained for the truth. But alas ! 
the truth in this case is marred, because in maintaining his 
argument the Professor often illogically assumes that the 
earth is only “ another planet.” I will quote some other 
of his conclusions :— 

(1) “ That the stellar universe forms one connected whole; and 
though of immense extent is yet finite, and its extent determinable.” 

(2) “That the solar system is situated in the plane of the Milky 
Way, and not far removed from the centre of that plane. The earth is 
therefore nearly in the centre of the stellar universe.” 

(3) “That this universe consists throughout of the same kinds of 
matter, and is subjected to the same physical and chemical laws. 

(4) “That no other planet in the stellar system than our earth is in¬ 
habited or habitable.” 

(5) “ That the probabilities are almost as great against any other 
sun (!) possessing inhabited planets.” 

(6) “ That the nearly central position of our (!) sun is probably a 
prominent one, and has been especially favourable, perhaps absolutely 
essential to life development upon the earth.” 

Thus, we obtain the writer’s conclusions in the foregoing 
six propositions ; in the last of which I again notice it is “ life 
development ” or evolution, as against creation. 

Now if all the variations of life on this so-called “ planet ” 

MAN’S place in the universe. 


of “ ours ’’ is by development or evolution, it would be quite 
proper to ask how life first started on the earth after it had 
cooled down sufficiently to form the so-called “crust of the 
globe.” Was it from a mere “ fortuitous concourse of atoms ?” 
Or was the operation directed by some intelligent mind, or 
cause ? And if the latter, then by whose mind was matter 
directed, and who guided the inert mass, and stamped upon 
it His design ? It appears to me that science, in rejecting 
the Creation recorded in the Bible, has got into a dense fog, 
where the wildest speculations prevail and nothing certain can 
be known. 

I deny the possibility of inert matter setting up any 
automatic force.' 

The trend of Professor Wallace’s argument is seen in the 
opening of chap. 6, where he says : “ Darwin solved the ori¬ 
gin of organic species from other species, and thus enabled 
us to understand how the whole of the existing forms of life 
have been developed out of pre-existing forms.” And he 
goes on to say that “ astronomers hope to be able to solve 
the problem of the evolution of suns from some earlier 
stellar types.” He adheres to the postulated predication 
that there is evolution everywhere ; and that man has 
been evolved from lower types: but the author of the 
book holds himself back, and will not go so far as Darwin did- 
in defining the question of the origin of life. There are 
two sets of facts, parallel and related, yet at the same time 
distinct. They are the physical facts of organic chemistry 
(which is the chemistry of carbon compounds) and the phy¬ 
sical facts of organized beings. There is no known reason 
why we may not make sugar, starch, or albumen from their 
elements ; but that would bring us no nearer to the production 
of a living starch-cell or the living germ of an egg. What 
science knows of matter and force gives us no trace of reason 
to suppose that its “professors” will ever produce a 
living organism—unless another order of existence is added 
to them—the psychical : life, mind, will. 

Life comes from life only ; therefore, spontaneous genera¬ 
tion, i.e., “ abiogenesis,” is a leap into illogical darkness. 
Where life appears there must be a life-giver—and that brings 
us to the Eternal self-existent Life-Giver whom we know as 
God—The Lord God-Jehovah, Creator of Heaven and Earth. 
Mr. Wallace says . “ there may be, and probably are, other 


man’s place in the universe. 


universes, perhaps of other kinds of matter, and subject to 
other laws, perhaps more like our conceptions of the ether, 
perhaps wholly non-material, and what we can only conceive 
as spiritual.” 

The author of the work under notice has shown no faith 
in the God of the Bible as the Creator, and in Jesus Christ 
as his Redeemer. But he has shown his belief in Spiritualism, 
which I understand he expounded and openly defended over 
twenty years ago. “ Perhaps ” and “ may be.” 

In some respects Dr. Wallace and Mr. Bruce Wallace are 
of the same calibre in regard to spiritualism : and neither of 
them will definitely assert his belief in one self-existent 
Eternal Being, the Creator of all, by whose creative Word 
all things came into existence ; because both their minds are 
darkened by the false idea of evolution, and the evils of 
spiritualism : so I am informed. But Dr. Wallace seems to 
have ceased making any open confession, he simply leaves 
us to suppose he inclines to the belief of man having a 
spiritual side to his organization, by quoting a few lines by 
Tennyson and Shakespeare here and there. And he flavours 
his writings with spicy lines such as: -‘What a piece of 
work is man. How noble in reason ! How infinite in faculty ! 
.In action how like an angel ! ” 

“ Spirit, nearing yon dark portal 
At the limit of thy human state, 

Fear not thou the hidden purpose 
Of that power which alone is Great. 

Nor the myriad world, His shadow, 

Nor the silent opener of the Gate.” 

This may be all very beautiful; and no doubt to the mind 
of Tennyson the concept conveyed in the teaching of the 
inherent Immortality of Man, apart from Christ, was a fixed 
one. But in any case the Bible and the God of the Bible 
are entirely left out, and ignored by the author of Man’s 
Place in the Universe. 

According to Dr. A. Wallace the faith which professors of 
modern science have hitherto placed in Sir Isaac Newton’s, 
theory of gravitation is somewhat slacking down, and its 
power of attraction is fading away. This is evident from 
Prof. Wallace’s statements as follows. He says : 



“ One of the greatest difficulties with regard to the vast system of 

stars around us is the question of its permanence and stability. 

But our mathematical astronomers can find no indications of such sta¬ 
bility of the stellar universe as a whole, if subject to the law of gravi¬ 
tation alone. In reply to some questions on this point, my friend, 
Professor George Darwin writes as follows: ‘A symmetrical annual 
system of bodies might revolve in a circle with or without a central body. 
Such a system would be unstable. If the bodies are of unequal masses 
and not symmetrically disposed, the break-up of the system would 
probably be more rapid than in the ideal case of symmetry. Mr. E.T. 
Whittaker (Secretary to the Royal Astronomical Society), to whom 
Professor Darwin sent my Questions, writes : 1 doubt whether the 
principal phenomena of the stellar universe are consequences of the 
law of gravitation at all.’ ” 

Then after quoting Professor Newcomb’s calculation as 
to the 

“ Effect of gravitation in a universe of 100 million stars, each five times 
the mass of our sun, and spread over a sphere which it would take light 
30,000 years to cross : ” 

with which he is not in harmony, he also states that: 

“ it is questionable whether the effect, which we call ‘ gravitation,’ 
given by Isaac Newton, is the cause of results in connection with the 
principal phenomena of the stellar universe. 

“ I have been working myself at spiral nebulte,” says Prof. Wallace, 

“ and have got a first approximation to an explanation—hut it is elec¬ 
tro—dynamical and not gravitational.” 

Accepting two different mathematician’s opinions the writer 
says that: 

“ We need not limit ourselves to the laws of gravitation as having 
determined the ptesent form of the stellar universe; and this is the 
more important because we may thus escape from a conclusion which 
many astronomers seem to think inevitable, viz., that the observed 
proper motions of the stars cannot be explained by gravitfctive forces 
of the system itself.” 

(To he continued , D.V.) 


By a Clergyman op the Ch. of England, 
(continued from p. 312). 

The same principle holds good on sea as it does on land. 
It is the principle of perspective , and this principle is univer¬ 
sal in its nature ; whether we look upward, landward or sea¬ 
ward, up or down a mountain ; whether a few feet from us, 
or as many miles distant; from the roof or window of a house, 



or the top of a mast. The sea is always seen to be hori¬ 
zontal, whether the observer stand on the shore or be on a 
ship ; whether a ship be sailing North or South, East or 
West, or in any direction between these cardinal points ; or 
North or South of the Equator. No point of the compass 
affects in the least the surface of the sea ; which is everlast¬ 
ingly horizontal. 

This observation, therefore, that the sea is horizontal is 
a fact; and whatever is contrary to the same is not a fact. 
This being the case it is strange that geographers should 
not be consistent in their illustrations. If it be accurate 
(which it is not) that a vessel is represented as >, 
sailing down a curved surface of the sea, like this : 
there is no reason why it should not sail tip a 
eurved sea-surface like this : ^ If these two ini- 

aginary illustrations represent a s ^ip sailing up 

and down a convex shaped sea-surface, 

there is no reason why a ship should not sail up and down 

a bay, like this : 

And, accordingly, 
reason why a ship 
.be represented as 
moving the remaining upper and lower arcs of the circle, like 
this: or like this: over the 

“north pole” *.and the 

“ south pole ” seas. In this way the whole 

circle of the earth’s surface (supposing it to be a globe, which 
is taken for granted but has never yet been proved by any 
facts) will have been sailed all over, like this ; 

a concave sea-surface in 
or like this : , 
there is no 
should not 

Having done with the circular imagination, touching navi¬ 
gation from a globite point of view, there is no reason why 
the geographer should not illustrate his theory by the 
Straight line method, such as setting a vessel on a north- 




bound direction, climbing up the sea, like this : 

like this, in a southerly direction : 
like this : ^ or. dmam like 

this : 

or up an 

or down, 

These being within F the line, I sailings 

might be represented as on the H outside 

of the diagonal line, like this, 
or sliding down, like this : 
whereupon the efforts of the 
imagination may have become 

Such illustrations are never drawn from nature ; photo¬ 
graphically they have no existence ; they are contrary to 
nature, and equally contrary to fact. 

Another serious inconsistency in the theoretic or imagin¬ 
ary geography artists, lies in this feature, that while they 
represent a boat as sailing down a curved sea, they do not 
draw the hull of the ship as parallel with the sea-surface, 
and the masts as at right-angles with the declining sea-sur¬ 
face ; the hull of the vessel, contrary to the laws of geometry, 
is made by geography-illustrators of the globite theory to 
be always horizontal, and the masts to be always perpendi¬ 
cular. The appearance of the boat therefore, whether as to 
hull or masts, disagrees with the globite theory but agrees 
with nature. The sea-surface of the globite, on the other 
hand, agrees with theory, hypothesis, and imagination, but 

disagrees with nature, and is contrary to nature. Consis¬ 
tency would demand that the barely visible highest portion 
of the rapidly disappearing vessel should 
represent the respective mast-ends to look 
slanting like this : 

that is diagonally as follows : 
so represented! The 
mast-ends is always perpend- 

but they never are 
appearance of the 

i c u 1 a r 

like this: 4 

This condition of things reminds one of the smart youth 
who wishes to pass for the patriarch, which he thought he 
could do by covering his cheeks and chin with & grey wig ; 
but unfortunately he forgot the head, which, being covered 
With a rich crop of light brown hair, betrayed the otherwise 





unsophisticated youth : the cat thereby was let out of the 

Taking all things into consideration, the conclusion can¬ 
not but be reached, that truth must ever prevail; that it is 
our duty to help in the dissemination of all truth ; and the 
counter duty must ever be borne in mind too, that error 
must be removed. Hence the practical thing for all geo¬ 
graphers is simply to replace the non-natural and misleading 
illustrations in their geography-books by illustrations in 
harmony with truth, fact, and nature ; and the sooner it is 
done, of course the better. Moreover, teaching and illus¬ 
tration should be in perfect harmony ; whereupon truth shall 
have won a victory in one department of science. One step 
at a time. 

By-and-by all error will be replaced by truth ; fancy and 
fiction by fact; and every evil resulting from the former by 
happiness introduced by the latter. 


By expressing the views of a large number of thinkers 
under the sun, all over the world, this may be a protest, 
and remain on record, that Zetetics at any rate, were not 
carried away nor deceived by the Synthetic Philosophic 
glamour ; neither did they swell the fulsome eulogies to the 
memory of a misguided man, some of whose enunciations 
have greatly assisted to chop the grounds of Christian faith 
from countless numbers of his fellow mortals. The fact that 
absolute truth slipped out sometimes in his writings is not 
singular, as it is almost impossible for anyone to write or 
speak at any length unless such occurs. 

Some may wonder why we abstained from going with the 
mob ; it is simply because Zetetics knowing the World is not 
a globe , are aware that this primary Fact knocks to pieces 
the vital part of the Spencerian Philosophy, and makes it 
of no effect. 

It is with due respect stated, that Herbert Spencer, the 
so-called publicist, and late figure-head of the synthetic- 
gaseous-School, died December 8th, 1903, and was by his 

own express pre-arrangement, burnt to ashes—in true pagan 
fashion—on the 14th, at Golder’s Green, while a large num¬ 
ber of sorrowing friends were in attendance. To say the 
least of this method of disposing of the dead ; it is a waste 
of fuel, which if used properly, would be the means of warm¬ 
ing many shivering living mortals, even if they had not food 
to cook, or garments to dry. 

Everyone who thinks, should know that the earth of the 
world is boundlessly sufficient to accommodate all men with 
decent graves when they depart this life,without any ill effects 
arising to the living, irrespective of any crack-brained germ 
theory ; more especially if the late philosopher’s original 
methods, as set forth in his earlier work entitled Social Sta¬ 
tics, were the order of the day. 

Unfortunately he ran away from those excellent pro¬ 
nouncements by his more recent utterances on the same 
vital subject, which can be seen by referring to The Per¬ 
plexed Philosopher by Henry George ; in which small book 
the late Herbert Spencer is clearly shown in effect, to efface 
himself by his own words, just as, in a similar way, the late 
Pope of Rome, Leo XIII.—who professed to be a great 
friend of humanity—was also exposed in The Condition of 
Labour, by that same Christian reformer—Henry George— 
whose works every thinker should carefully read. 

A fool hath said in his heart, God is not.” {Dr. Young's 
lit. trans.) But Zetetics, and fortunately millions of other 
people know the opposite. Therefore, in spite of all the 
deep-rooted fallacies existing ; and dogmatically presented as 
truth by the Neo Elementary Theoretical School of Phil¬ 
osophers, (synthetic or otherwise,) all who possess know¬ 
ledge of God, and “ believe He is," should continually and 
fearlessly declare it. 

Doubtless Herbert Spencer was an innovator by his 
Theory of the Universe, but to what good ? He was 
not only avowedly not an orthodox Christian, but he out¬ 
went all the flabby, weak-kneed varieties in.his systematic 
and utter rejection of Christian beliefs and claims ; and 
finished by directing that he should be calcined after death, 
almost it seems in final defiance of Christian usage ; 
especially when such natural and respectful usage was 
perfectly possible to perform. 

Does any reasonable being think the condition of the 



world would be worse than it is, if the printed outcome of 
the Neo Philosophical School was cremated to-day ? Zetetics 
think not; they also do not feel called upon to bow down 
to simply so many extra ounces of brains, especially when 
the grey substance, of which those brains are partly com¬ 
posed, starts operating from a wrong premiss; but Zetetics 
are content to gather wisdom from well balanced (even 
if smaller) brains : who enunciate truth as revealed in God’s 

Pythagoras, Cusa, Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, La Place, 
Darwin, Lord Kelvin, and the rest may be quoted over and 
over again, until reasonable people are tired of such clap¬ 
trap, and scholastic humbug ; but the individual who knows 
that the surface of undisturbed water everywhere is horizontal, 
is absolutely proof against the whole hypothetical battery 
of misguided philosophers, ancient or modern, even if then- 
brain capacity is paraded sometimes as being something 

When what is called a message to mankind, starts from a 
suppositious indefinity about the unknowable, environed 
in primeval gas and mud, it may be considered not only 
worthless, but downright pernicious in its influence, no 
matter whether it is expounded by a Herbert Spencer, the 
Pope of Rome, an Archbishop of Canterbury, or any holder- 
forth in a school, college, or so-called little Bethel. Unfor¬ 
tunately, if many ministers,—especially those of the Free 
Churches,—have courage to preach the pure and simple 
Truth, without scientific (?) garnishings, they run the risk 
of seeing their congregations melt away, their reputations 
destroyed, and of being black-listed by their fellows. 

The conscientious man who wishes to stand by the Bible, 
and preach from it alone, will soon find himself involved in a 
religious system which is open to the most brutal intimi¬ 
dations of money, and brow-beating, from those calling them¬ 
selves his superiors, though they may not be worthy to 
black his shoes. 

Now, if this state of affairs is in the smallest degree one 
of the outcomes of the Spencerian, or other philosophy of 
the same family, the sooner such philosophy is exposed in 
all its nakedness, the better it will be for the people at large, 
and for those ministers who really want to be consistent in 
their calling. 




All Communications and enquiries respecting this Magazine and the teaching it 
upholds , and all questions and matter for insertion , should be addressed to 
E.A.M.B., ii, Gloucester Road, Kingston Ilill. 


The Ed. does not necessarily endorse statements made under the headings of The 
Earth's ObservatoryLetters , etc ., unless signed Ed. The Earth. 

It will be seen from the following paragraphs, reprinted from the July num¬ 
ber of Past and Futuie, that someone has asked its editor (Mr. J. B. Dimblehy) 
for a BIBLE TEXT proving the earth has motion ; and Mr. Dimbleby flounders 
about pitiably trying to prove it. Others can see his illogical arguments, and 
his pathetic floundering ; but I pray that erelong he may be led to a knowledge 
of the truth regarding Creation himself. 

“ Will you give me a Bible text which bears out your contention that the 
writers of Holy Scripture believed and taught that the earth moves ? 

“ There are several astronomical facts known to us which are not mentioned 
in the Bible. The writers of Holy Scripture do not tell us that the length of the 
solor year is about 365J: days ; yet they speak of solar years. The years of the 
births and lives of the patriarchs are always solar years, not lunar. But there 
are passages of Scripture from which we learn both the rotation and the annual 
revolution of the earth. Gen. i. 5, speaks of the “ first day." The 20th of 
September is always the first sidereal day of the year caused by the rotation of 
the earth. It differs in length from all the other days of the year which have a 
natural increase owing to the earth moving in her obit. In Gen. i. 19, we also 
read of a “ fourth day," when the earth reaches the point of the autumnal equi¬ 
nox. On the first day of the year the earth is diametrically opposite the centre 
of her orbit; but on the fourth day she has moved opposite to the sun which 
is not in the centre of her orbit. Hence on the iourth day the earth has thrice 
gained the difference between the length of the sidereal and the tropical day. 
If the earth had no revolution in an orbit round the sun she could not daily 
make this gain throughout the year, which amounts to nearly four minutes 
each day. This is also a proof that the cosmogony of the opening chapter of 
Genesis consisted of natural days of 24 hours, and not long periods. 

“I am of opinion that both the rotation and the revolution of the earth are 
clearly taught in the first chapter of Genesis, and that the points mentioned are 
scientific, surpassing our English civil year. 

“ It is owing to the tropical day being nearly four minutes longer than the 
sidereal or rotation day that we gain one day every year, which comes to a year 
ir, 360 years ; but we are not sensible of this without referring the position of 
the earth to the stars. It is because the earth moves about a degree in her 
orbit daily that this gain is effected. 

“ 1 am quite disposed to think that Moses understood all this. The Egyptians 
amongst wtiom he lived during 40 years before going into Arabia were precise 
observers of the motions of the earth and stars. Their Sothic Cycle taught 
them this. It is the falling back of sidereal time which produces the heliacal 
rising of Sirius at each quarter of the great zodiac of 649 years, that is to say 
alter each 162 years, except at the fourth quarter of 649 when the earth in the 
east has the sun behind her.” 

“ In the Christmas number of ‘ Home Chat ’ Lady Blount deals deadly blows 
at the people who still utter the shibboleth that the earth is round. The glob¬ 
ular h\ pothesis is, i. her ladyship’s opinion, ‘the greatest myth of science.’ 
Her figures illustrate her argument, and it is obvious that, like President Kru¬ 
ger, who was a strong Protectionist of the Chamberlain type. Lady Blount 
regards the pan.ake theory of astronomy in the light of a Divine revelation. 
But we hope that nobody will tumble over the edge of this terrestial soup-plate.” 
—Daily News , December 31st, 1903. 



It is a pity the ignorant writer of the above does not attempt to go far enough 
South to try and tumble over the edge, before writing such twaddle. The poor 
wretch has never thought how long he, or anything else, would be able to stop 
on, were the world the absurd shape he infers it is.—H. H. S. 

“ When the Roman Inquisition condemned the illustrious Gallileo and laid 
the progress of astronomy under anathema, and commanded the centre of the 
solar system itself to run respectfully round the earth—(laughter)—the pious 
absurdity was more pernicious just in proportion to all the power of the Inquisi¬ 
tion.”— The Protestant Observer, January, 1904. 

On Tuesday evening, January 26th, Lady Blount delivered a lecture to a large 
and appreciative audience, in the south aisle of St. Paul’s Church,Clerkenwell, on 
the subject of the earth. After being eloquently introduced by Mr. W. G. 
Musgrave (a lay minister of the Church), who took the chair, her ladyship pro¬ 
ceeded in a lucid and able manner, without any notes, to deal with a subject 
which ever occupies the attention of the sages throughout the world. 

The above forms the opening words of a long report, sent in by C. E. Parker- 
Rhodes, Esq. ; but lack of space precludes the possibility of printing any of the 
different reports of lectures in this issue. The Ed. also regrets that Mr. John¬ 
son's reports of her lectures, delivered at Y.M.C.A., Kingston-on-Thames, and 
also at numerous other places must likewise be held over for a future issue. 

“ HOW any reasoning man who believes the elementary 
theories of evolution, of ASTRONOMY, and geology, can 
accept the doctrine of the atonement is a marvel.”—Dr. E. 
W. Bullinger, D.D. From Things to Come, Feb., 1904. 

Q. — Is it Biblical knowledge that the stars revolve? Ans.—It is indirectly: 
for the stars like the sun and moon were made “ to give light upon the earth ; ” 
and as they can shine only over about one-half of the earth at one time, the 
inference would be that they must revolve. 

Q.—If the Scriptures are scientific authorities, how do you explain Gen. vii. 
11 ? Are there windows in heaven, as stated ; or is this but a metaphor ? 
Ans.—The Hoi)'' Scriptures are “scientific” in the true sense. That is they 
are accurate in respect to what they teach about the earth, the sun, and the 
moon, and the stars, etc. Therefore I have no hesitation in saying that Gen. 
vii. II. is strictly correct; but the marginal reading appears to he the better 
translation ; so we should read : “And the Hood-gates of heaven were opened.” 
I believe that there are such flood-gates. 

Q.—Can the sun, like a ship, be brought back to view, after disappearance ? 
Ans.—The sun cunnot be brought back to view by a telescope after sunset. 
But if we could rise up sufficiently high in a balloon we should* see the sun 
again. Balloonists have seen this phenomenon. 

Q. — If the earth is, as you say, a circular plane, please what is the thickness 
of it? We do not know the thickness of the earth, that is the dry land ; and 
it is probable that the thickness varies in different places. 

Q.—Do you consider the Sun to he a globe, or merely a plane ? Ans.—The 
sun is evidently spherical, but it is not a solid body ; it is like a large luminous 
spherical balloon, floating in the “ether,” or soft matter, which fills the space 
between the earth and the waters, and “the firmament of the heaven ” above. 

Q.—Why does the sun when rising, appear, not as a whole, getting larger, 
hue a little at a lime, till the whole sun appears? Ans.—The sun rises a little 
at a time because of its size. One edge (the higher edge) of the sun comes into 
the angle of vision before the other. And for the same reason the lower edge 
is the first to reach the line of sight and so disappear. 

“ The two last verses of Nothing are most acceptable to me as a lover of 
truth.”—T.H.DeV. T. _ ♦ 

“ Have you seen what the Bishop of Ripon says, in the Sunday Strand , 
about Creation account in Genesis ? This is the bishop who, a few months ago, 
caused such a sensation in the country by his publicly denying the Divinity of 
Christ. Also have you seen what H. J. Mackinder, Reader in Geography to 
the University of Oxford, said at the head teachers’ conference, on the 7th inst. ? 
He urged his hearers to abolish, from the junior schools, all maps, and begged 
them not to talk of the globe , but of the great realities of nature. We are 
getting on. We are getting on.”—E. J. S. 

“On receiving The Earth % a few days ago, I felt what is so well expressed 
by one of your contributors, viz. : that 1 I experienced one of the greatest joys 
of my life * when I commenced reading several of the articles, especially yours 
on my dear teacher and Instructor, Dr. Bullinger. He is a great favourite of 
mine, as a writer, and has been for many years; for I fell in love with his 
Things to Come soon after its commencement. I have read it ever since, and 
he has been my spiritual guide ever since. * The article expresses my views all 
through,and it is always pleasing to find our views confirmed, especially by those 
we know and esteem. 

“ I think the globites are on their last legs. I am as sure as that we are 
alive at this moment, that they have no other reason to give of the earth being 
a globe, than this : that finding what they call the North pole has suggested to 
them the South pole; and they have been searching for it ever since. But 
every attempt has been a failure; which they must have realized themselves, 
otherwise they would have made as many attempts to discover it as they have 
the North Pole. Even in the last expedition they suggest that their object 
was not so much to find the pole, as to make other obseivations. 

“ Whoever reads Captain Cook’s account of the South Seas, will be convinced 
(if of an unprejudiced mind) that none but idiots would attempt to go further 
than he did in search of a pole, or anything else ; as there could be nothing but 
sudden and irretrievable loss to those acting contrary to his advice and action. 
And Captain Cook was no coward. 

“ It is worse than madness to say that the sun is a million times larger than 
the earth. Both the sun and moon are small bodies (as you say) in comparison 
with the earth—and no doubt the stars also. Seeing them principally through 
a vacuum we can form no definite idea of their size, or elements. We notice the 
great difference between the appearance of the sun when rising and setting ; 
at the latter stage its size is increased more than fourfold, because seen through 
the medium of denser air. 

“ How difficult it is to make people understand the distance at which our sight 
fails to perceive any object on land. I have noticed persons walking in the 
meadows near my residence, and found that the height of them, from head to 
foot, as I marked on the window pane through which I looked, was only the 
eighth of an inch, i.e. : at that distance the eighth of an inch really represented 
their height. Now any school boy could readily tell at what distance they 
would be lost to sight ; after which a telescope would restore them, until, in 
turn, its power would be lost. The rule of the globist is, that at a distance equal 
to 2,OUO limes the height of any object it would he lost to the unassisted eye ; and 
he will not understand why the sun does not illuminate the whole earth simulta¬ 
neously. Were the sun a million times larger than the earth its light would be 
shown allover the world, and there would be no darkness ; but the sun is a small 
body ever revolving above and around the earth, so as to give alternate day and 
night, as ordained by an all-wise Creator.”—From AN OCCASIONAL 

“ I am very much interested in your teaching. Though I must candidly ad¬ 
mit that I cannot think entirely with you ; I recognize the important fact that 
vours is the only logical and consistent view that any professed believer in the 
Bible can take” —FRANK WHEELER. 

“Your reply to Mr. Biatchford is the best that has been written. Kindly 
send me 100 copies as soon as possible.”—W. V. 




IVe have much pleasuie in recommending the above work. 

T [ le i b °° k Ct contains the three thousand words, and idioms 
which are most used in ordinary conversation ; sufficient to 
enable you to talk French all your life ; no fossil philological 
peculiarities, but French as it is actually spoken in France. 
Grammar underlies each group of examples, and we think 
this a cleverly condensed method of teaching the French 


The Author of French in Three Months also gives Lessons 
in Conversational French to adults, at 




Friends of the Ed. of this Magazine can testify to his ability 
and agreeable way of teaching. 

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co., 


22, Budge Row. Cannon Street, 


Price of Appliances £1 Is., £2 2s., & £3 3s. 

Instalments may be arranged. 



Nos. 45 & 46. 


Therefore the idea of gravitation (which truly belongs to 
the regions of metaphysics, existing only in imagination 
and not in fact) is falling into discredit, and one might 
almost say into disrepute. Professor Wallace’s book sheds 
more than one ray of hope that the light of reason is dawning 
upon the minds of some of the science-makers, the evidence 
of which appears in one of his quotations from Professor 
Huxley :—“ that the results you get out of the 1 mathematical 
mill 1 depend entirely on what you put into it.” 

True ! If you put o in you 11 get o out. And my advice 
in seeking after truth is this: if you don’t possess a real 
standard unit to start your mill, don’t forge one ! It won’t pay 
in the long run, because although the faith some have in the 
Bible may be very weak in comparison to that which they 
have placed in this world’s “wisdom” yet honesty will ever 
be found “ the best policy.” But earnest Christians who are 
real truth-seekers and truth-lovers will never relax their 
faith in the Bible, when they have proved it to be true, be¬ 
cause thev “ know whom the}- have believed ” in too real a 
sense ever possibly to be shaken by any mere man-made 
system, however cunningly it may be constructed. 

Prof. Wallace has ingeniously endeavoured to make the 
various portions of the globular hypothesis dovetail into each 
other, and thus present a glossed surface ot apparent con¬ 
sistency ; that is, in the eyes of some, but not of all. Because 
personally I can perceive no true gloss of beaut)’. But 
nevertheless the most carefully polished fallacy can only 
present external and transient attractions, even to those 
whose minds have been grossly fed upon that which will 
not stand the searching test of the Word of the Living God. 
Moreover, the most cleverly framed Scripture-contradicting 
myths present no “ face value ” to the keen truth-seeker. 
No mere superficial glitter can hide from his penetrating gaze 




We have much P le asuie in recommending the above work. 

The booklet contains the three thousand words, and idioms 

n bfeTouTotT^r 1 " °n rdi r y —ersation sufficient to 

pe arfe h F y ° Ur Hfe 110 f ° ssi ! Philological 

Gramm, , r ^ 35 * is actua,1 T s P oken France. 

thiS a clev^f er ! ICS , eaCh f r ° UP ° f CXam P IeS ' and «'e think 
r Y '- onc lensed method of teaching the French 

The Author of French in Three Months also g.ves Lessons 
in Conversational French to adults, at 




Friends of the Ed of this Magazine can testify to his ability 
and agreeable way of teaching 

' o 1 

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co., 


22, Budge Row, Cannon Street, 


Price of Appliances £1 Is, £2 2s, & £3 3s. 

Instalments may be arranged. 


Vol. IV. Nos. 45 & 46. 


Therefore the idea o (gravitation (which truly belongs to 
the regions of metaphysics, existing only in imagination 
and not in fact) is falling into discredit, and one might 
almost say into disrepute. Professor Wallace’s book sheds 
more than one ray of hope that the light of reason is dawning 
upon the minds of some of the science-makers, the evidence 
of which appears in one of his quotations from Professor 
I luxley :—that the results you get out of the ‘ mathematical 
mill ’ depend entirely on what you put into it.” 

True ! If you put o in you 11 get o out. And my advice 
in seeking after truth is this : if you don’t possess a real 
standard unit to start your mill, don’t forge one ! It won’t pay 
in the long run, because although the faith some have in the 
Bible may be very weak in comparison to that which they 
have placed in this world’s “wisdom” yet honesty will ever 
be found “the best policy.” But earnest Christians who are 
real truth-seekers and truth-lovers will never relax their 
faith in the Bible, when they have proved it to be true, be¬ 
cause they “ know whom they have believed ” in too real a 
sense ever possibly to be shaken by any mere man-made 
system, however cunningly it maybe constructed. 

Prof. Wallace has ingeniously endeavoured to make the 
various portions of the globular hypothesis dovetail into each 
o'.her, and thus present a glossed surface ot apparent con¬ 
sistency ; that is, in the eyes of some, but not of all. Because 
personally 1 can perceive no true gloss of beaut)’. But 
nevertheless the most carefully polished lallacy can only 
present external and transient attractions, even to those 
whose minds have been grossly fed upon that which will 
not stand the searching test of the Word of the Living God. 
Moreover, the most cleverly framed Scripture-contradicting 
myths present no “ face value ” to the keen truth-seeker. 
No mere superficial glitter can hide from his penetrating gaze 

35 <-> 


unsoundness which lies beneath. And in spite of adroit 
burnishing performed with rare agates carefully prepared for 
the purpose by the author of all lies, still he who rests in 
the Word of the Lord knows assuredly that only “ The 
foundation of God standeth sure,” and everything built on 
other foundation—however apparently smooth may be its 
surface— must eventually come to nought, and fall to rise no 
more ! 

Prof. Wallace has taken the globe theoiy for his basis, 
therefore his primary assumptions remain unproved, and, at 
the risk of offending the great upholders of “The New 
Astronomy,” I will venture to mention some things which 
refuse to “fall into line” with ordinary common-sense de¬ 

Take, for example, the theory about the origin of the 
moon, and the formation of the ocean beds. Professor Dar¬ 
win—who appears to be Dr. Wallace’s oracle—originated the 
former notion, which is that the earth, at some remote date, 
(being still in a practically fluid condition.) was spinning 
round at a rate variously estimated at from 2 to 4 hours 
per turn ; it bulged out in the equatorial regions ; and mat¬ 
ters reached a critical climax when the centrifugal force 
overcame the gravitational and cohesive powers of the rota¬ 
ting ellipsoid. Two or more pieces were torn out of its 
flanks, and ultimately coalesced—forming the moon. 

What a strange conception ! The pieces are said to have 
kept at first in close proximity to the earth's surface, though 
gradually, the loosened masses were pushed outwards, fur¬ 
ther and further away from’the earth. Here Dr. Wallace 
has placed himself on the horns of a mechanical dilemma, 
seeing that if the mass that was ultimately to make up the 
moon detached itself in separate pieces from the fast revolv¬ 
ing earth (through excess of centrifugal force) the various 
pieces must—according to the Law of Mechanics—have been 
flung outwards at a tangent normal to the radius drawn to 
the point of separation ; though if the earth were in a more 
or less fluid condition—as these professors maintain—the 
separation would not necessarily be an abrupt one. That 
makes it more difficult for one to imagine how the separation 
of a fluid mass can be affected in separate portions. 

Without carrying this point as far as I should fairly be 
entitled to do, I will simply ask—if this is a fact—whether 


anything (apart from intelligence) could cause these portions 
to be exactly' balanced, and exactly on opposite sides? If 
they were not so balanced, and on exactly opposite sides, 
with such a high speed of rotation the)’would throw the main 
bod)’, just as a fast-running and ill-balanced pulley can shake 
a mill wall to pieces. The earth would not travel along its 
orbit in a smooth line, but would describe a subsidiary small 
orbit round the common centre of gravity formed by its own 
mass, and that of the detached portions, independent of the 
rotation on its axis (though how a globe, rushing through 
space, can rotate on its axis is inconceivable). If the union 
of the various fragments took place suddenly, aud while still 
in close proximity to the earth, the throwing effect I have 
referred to would be intensified. 

Rut I again state that, apart from agreeing with Dr. Wal¬ 
lace that the stars are not other inhabited worlds, and that 
the whole universe is so constructed as to be adapted to man’s 
organism and necessities, I look upon “The New Astron¬ 
omy,” from its foundation as a pagan delusion and God- 
denying theory. , . 

I note that Prof. Wallaee state the mass of the moon to 
be one-fiftieth of that of the earth ; but Sir Robert Ball, in, 
Earth's Beginning, put it at one-eightieth. Who is correct, 
Sir Robert Ball, or Dr. Alfred Russell Wallace? 

I am not interested to know which moon-theory the learned 
doctor espouses—for I take the Bible and my own God-given 
senses alone as my guide in the matter; but it seems right 
to expose these fallacies in detail, wearying though it may be. 

Among other things, Dr. Wallace makes out, in conjunc¬ 
tion with Mr. Ormond Fisher, that the pieces which detached 
themselves from the earth, to form the moon, left pits, which 
served subsequently to become the basins of the seas. He 
always says that these ocean beds are placed in almost 
complete symmetry with regard to the equator. This is not 
so. He further says (on p. 275), that “the highest moun¬ 
tains in every part of the globe very often exhibit on their 
loftiest summits stratified rocks, which contain marine organ¬ 
isms, and were, therefore, originally laid down beneath the 
sea.” If this be so, what about the “ moon-prepared ocean 
bed ? ” 

Dr. Wallace tells us (on p. 234) that, it has been shown 
by means of the spectroscope, that double stars of short 


period do originate from a single star (as the moon originated 
from the earth) ; “ but in these cases it seems probable that 
the parent star is in the gaseous state,” and thus we are told 
new stars are made from old ones “ while we wait ” ! So 
say these modern science satellites ! 

Under the heading, “ The sun a typical star,” readers are 
treated to a short discourse upon “ sun-spots,” and that the 
body of the sun is gaseous ; but, what we commonly term 
the sun is really the bright spherical nucleus of a nebulous 
body. “ This ” semi-liquid glowing surface is termed the 
photosphere, since from it are given out the light and heat 
which reach the earth.” Immediately above this surface is 
the “ reversing layer, consisting of dense metallic vapours, 
only a few hundred miles thick (!). Above the reversing 
layer comes the chromosphere—surrounding the sun to a 
depth of about 4,000 miles. The chromosphere and its 
quiescent prominences appear to be truly gaseous, consisting 
of hydrogen, helium, and coronium, while eruptive prom¬ 
inences show the presence of metallic vapours, especially 

calcium.Beyond the red chromosphere and prominences 

is the marvellous white glory of the corona which extends 
to an enormous distance round the sun.” Immensity in 
size and speed seems to be the acme of the astronomer’s 

Dr. Wallace states that the stars are suns, and on p. 143, 
referring to the age of the sun, says: “enormous epochs 
during which our sun has supported life upon this earth— 
must have been incomparably less than its whole existence 
as a light giver—that the life of most stars must be counted 
by hundreds, or perhaps by thousands of millions of years.” 
(Of course this includes the earth, from which the moon was 
shot off!) 

Now whether Dr. Wallace is correct regarding the nature 
of the sun’s component parts, I will refrain from expressing 
my opinion, further than to say that to some extent at least 
I doubt its accuracy. But I know that he is wrong regard¬ 
ing the age of the sun and stars ; because in his statements 
he has contradicted the Scriptures, wherein we read that 
God created the sun and the moon on the fourth day of 
Creation week—and the stars also (see Gen. i.) 

Regarding motion, the author of this book says : “ How 
these motions originated and are regulated we do not know, 



but there they are ; ” and, speaking of the motions of the 
stars, he says : “ although they appear to move in straight 
lines, they may really be moving in curved orbits.” 

True Zetetics love facts and seek them, but nothing is a 
fact which is contrary to the Creator’s Word. Yet alas ! 
even as evil men denied and killed the Prince of Life, so do 
many now deny, and seek to slay the W orc.1 of Truth. 

One of Prof. Wallace’s primary contentions is, that the 
earth is the only inhabited world. This, as I have already 
stated, on Bible lines ive endorse; but, apart from Holy Writ, 
we think it impossible to come to such a conclusion from 
the professor’s standpoint ; because as he describes the 
principles and physical conditions of all human life, and its 
basis, to consist of the elements of oxygen, nitrogen, hydro¬ 
gen, and carbon, it does not follow God could not create 
life upon a phvsical basis entirely different from ours, and 
completely beyond our conception. 


A short time ago 1 published a pamphlet under the above 
title, with a diagram on page 17, which also appeared in 1 he 
Earth for October and November, 1903, Nos. 39 & 40, p. 
275. The diagram was a representation of the globe with 
the equator as a straight line, and the tropics of Cancer and 
Capricorn also were shown as straight lines at a distance of 
231, degrees from the equator; the lines produced beyond 
and outside the globe were to show the sun’s relative position 
when in the tropics, and also to show that when in these 
positions the direct rays of the sun cannot reach the two 
poles. Readers should refer to that diagram, and compare 
it with the diagrams which follow. 

Two or three correspondents have been pleased to criticise 
the diagram above referred to, as not exactly representing 
the globular theory. So it is necessary to write this aiticle, 
and to give a few further thoughts upon this subject. 

Many of our readers have, perhaps, never realized how 
very difficult it would be to represent the globular theory 



exactly. It would be impossible for us to do so. The 
astronomers themselves never do so. High-class works on 
geography and map projection generally have the same 
defect. Why therefore should I be required to give what is 
not found, either in works on astronomy or in recognized 
standard atlases ? However, I gave some approach to the 
theory ; something which I think fairly represents the theory, 
while at the same time comparing that theory with some 
known facts. I cannot yield to the globular theory, nor 
accept all its wild hypotheses. 

Now it has been thought by the correspondents above 
referred to, that I ought not to have made the lines in my 
diagram, representing the tropics of Capricorn, Cancer, and 
the equator, parallel straight lines, nor have produced the line 
say representing the tropic of Cancer to A (see diagram 
referred to). And it was thought that the diagram in Celestial 
Phenomena does not give the sun in its true position on the 
globular theory. 

It has been said that the sun should be placed on a line 
drawn from the centre of the globe through the end of the 
line representing the tropic of Cancer as at E, and beyond 
in the following diagram I. This diagram I shall refer 
to later on. 

Even then we shall find this would not be in exact accord¬ 
ance with the globular theory, as I will show later on. But 
it is thought that the line should be produced from centre 
E through E 1 , and beyond, so that the observer at E 1 Would 
see the sun vertical at noon. And vertical to a globularist 
means that an imaginary line should pass from the centre 
of the earth into “ space,” through the point where the ob¬ 
server is said to stand. 

I his then fairly represents the globularist’s objection, with 
which I shall proceed to deal. But I have some remarks to 
make first, under heading of my new diagram I. 



Map Projection, 

Diagram I 

The above diagram represents the general projection given 
with the Map of the world, that is with one so-called hemis¬ 
phere. The equator C E M is given as a straight line ; the 
tropic of Cancer—PI i E 1 —as a curved line, curving 
towards the North ; and R Ri as another curved line—the 
Arctic Circle—also curving towards and around the North 
“ Pole”—A. South of the equator we have the line II I 1 , as 
the tropic of Capricorn, curved inwards towards the South, 
that is in a direction opposite to the northern tropicj and 
lastly, the curved line—L L 1 —round the so-called South 
“ Pole.” And we have been taught to receive this account 
of globular projection without any questioning. But let us 
examine it a little. 



First ict us ask what determines the points H and E, for 
the tropic of Cancer ? 

It will I suppose be replied that they are 23i degrees 
from the points C and M on the equator, measured along the 
curve towards the North Pole. Then if the point E 1 be 
23A degrees from the equator, measure along the curved 
line M l'A A will the point (t) also be the same number of 
degrees from the point E taken as being on the equator? 
If not, why not? If it be the same, then we have the fact 
cropping out, that on all maps of the world the degrees 
measured along a straight meridian from E to A are not as 
large as those measured along the curved meridian M E 1 A. 
And if each degree measures, as we are told it does, 60 
geographical miles, then the distance in such miles from M 
to A, along the curve, would be 5,400 geographical miles ; 
while from E to A the line would be only about 3,436 such 
miles, for anyone can see that the distance from E to A is 
considerably less than the distance along M Ei to A. 

So that all our maps of the world are out of the truth, 
with respect to the size of countries measured from the 
equator, either towards the North or towards the South, even 
on the globular assumption. And the scale of miles is also 
wrong in this direction, as given with such maps. Also as 
the meridians recede from the centre to either side the scale 
is always altering until we reach the outside circle. But if 
we were to take E u as the true scale for the 23! degrees, then 
h' 2 e 1 would represent the tropic of Cancer : that is the upper 
curve of the two. And the same may be said of the two 
lower curves—Ii Band i2 i 1 . Which of these represents 
the true tropic ? I leave readers to take their choice. 

But notice what a difference it would make to the sun’s 
position North. In one case the globularist would contend 
that the sun should be seen along the line E E 1 , somewhere 
in the direction of E n ; and in the other case somewhere 
along the line E e 1 , or about e 11 . 

Readers may take their choice ; for both positions are 
founded on globular assumptions ! And both tropics, which¬ 
ever we take North and South, are untrue to the lines of 
perspective. In the North, the Arctic Circle R R 1 would 
shoot off northwards into space ; and in the South the Ant¬ 
arctic Circle, L L 1 , would also shoot off into space in an 
opposite direction. But I will leave for the present globular 
map projection, and ask my readers to notice diagram II. 



“ Parallels of Latitude.’’ 

D 1 A G 1 A M 

We now have briefly to consider diagram II., which is 
based on a more natural projection. 

If the spectator be supposed to be in such a position that 
he can see the Arctic Circle as a curve, and not a straight 
line, then the other great circles should be shown in a 
similar position as regards their curvature. In other words, 
the tropic of Cancer—H E 1 —should curvate towards the 
North ; the equator—C E M—should do the same ; the tropic 
of Capricorn—I I 1 —should also curve in the same general 
direction ; and the Antarctic Circle—L L 1 —the same ; all 
of them traversing the earth in the same general direction 
as the rest of the parallels of latitude. 

These circles are known as “ parallels of latitude,” and 
therefore they should all be PARALLEL ! But this would 
expose the position of geographers and astronomers in 
making the parallels north of the equator curvate in one 
direction, while the so-called “parallels” south curvate in 


another and opposite direction ! I fear there is more trick¬ 
ery about the globe and its delineations than most of our 
readers are yet aware ! 

Let us now notice the relative position of the sun in the 
tropics. We will draw a line from E as the centre of the 
supposed globe, and pass it through E 1 , towards the sun at 
E u , for the tropic of Cancer. Similarly we will draw a 
straight line from E through I 1 towards T, for the position 
of the sun when in the tropic of Capricorn. How does that 
suit our opponents ? 

If someone should suggest that the diagram of the globe 
should be tilted, and that the “ axis ”—A B—should be 
inclined 23J degrees from the vertical, all they need do is 
to tilt the paper just so much—or as much more as they like ! 
It is more convenient for printing as we have placed it. 

But we should like to know why the globe should be so 
tilted ; and whether it is deemed more proper to tilt the 
“ axis ” 23^ degrees to the right, or to the left ? Perhaps 
some astronomer might be able to enlighten us on this point, 
and give us reasons for his hypothesis. But I must pass on: 
these two diagrams are merely preliminary to what I have 
to say in connection with diagram III. 

Diagram III 




True Parallels of Latitude. 

If we want one general view of the so-called •' globe,' 1 with 
the Equator as a straight line, we must make all the lines 
denoting latitude, both north and south, parallel to the 
equator. I have so placed the leading parallels of latitude 
in diagram III. The central line C E M represents the 
equator ; H E 1 the tropic of Cancer ; and R the Arctic 
Circle. South of the equator I l l would represent the tropic 
of Capricorn ; and L L 1 the Antarctic Circle. The line A B 
would represent the supposed “ axis ” of the globe, as it 
passes through the centre of the earth at E. 

In a former article and diagram the sun was placed on a 
continuation of the equatorial line as at S, so that a spectator 
at M would see the sun on the 21st of March, directly over 
his head in the direction of S. But when the sun arrives at 
the tropic of Cancer, in the northern midsummer, it is said 
to be 23I7 degrees north of the equator. In other words, 
the same spectator at M, on the equator, would see the sun 
at S 1 23! degrees from his former vertical position at M S. 
Therefore, to place the midsummer sun there corresponds 
with fact ; but it does not correspond with the astronomical 
theory, so the objector says that the midsummer sun -should 
be placed in the line E E 1 E 11 . 

That is the 23 1 degrees, they say, should be measured 
from the centre of the globe ! Yet no one in this world ever 
saw the sun from that position ; so that I am required to 
sacrifice fact to fancy; and instead of putting the sun at 
S 1 , where it is actually seen in summer, I am asked to place 
it at E 11 , as though it were seen from the centre of the 
earth ! 

To please the objector I will place the sun there for argu¬ 
ments’ sake, and then let us notice what follows. When the 
sun is at E u , the spectator on the equator, at M, would see 
it at some angle nearer to 40 degrees from the vertical than 
23! degrees. This angle would be greater or less great ac¬ 
cording to the various distances at which the sun might be 
placed, but it would never some down to the required 23! 
degrees. Besides Zetetics have on several occasions given 
proof that the sun is not at such a great distance from the 
earth. But we have have placed it as far ofl as it was in the 
former diagrams, and no objection has been raised to the 


distance of the sun from the earth, but only to the angular 
position given. 

Now, as a matter of fact, a spectator at the equator sees 
the sun at 23-i degrees from the vertical ; therefore, the sun’s 
position at is not its true position. This may be seen by 
making at S M S 1 an angle of 2 sh degrees ; and afterwards 
drawing a line from M to E u , making, with S M, an angle 
nearly twice as great ! 

Again, if the sun be placed at E u , and we draw a line 
parallel to the equator across the so-called “ globe,” it would 
about coincide with the line R R 1 , and so the tropic of Can¬ 
cer would be super-imposed on the Arctic Circle ! Would 
this suit our globular friends ? 

But why should the objector stop at E 11 ? Why not go on 
to E m ? In this case we should have the tropic of Cancer, il 
represented at all, outside the globe, a long way north ol 
the North Pole itself—say at TT 1 ! If we must take the 
globular theory for our standard, we should find it imposs¬ 
ible to properly represent it oh paper. W e should have to 
continue the line from the centre of the globe, at E through 
Eh on to E a , on to E 8 , on and on for 92 millions of miles! 
This would be the globular theory with a vengeance. 

But who could represent it? And yet some have objected 
because I have-not been true to the theory in every detail. 
It is impossible to be true to it. The astronomers them¬ 
selves are never true to it; nor are the geographers and 
those who bring out map projections. Some of the diagrams 
in the best astronomical works outrageously misrepresent 
their own theories, and the reader is thus deceived. I could 
give instances, but it would make my article too long, and 
require too many diagrams. 

What 1 have already shown ought to be sufficient. But 
I will point out another fact. If the sun were a million 
times larger than the globe, the globe would be a mere mote 
in comparison to the sun, and it would be impossible for 
one half of it to be darkness at any time ; the rays from one 
side of the sun would overlap or go beyond the north pole 
on the one hand, and the rays from the other side of the 
sun would overlap or go beyond the so-called south pole ! 
Try reader for yourself. Make your diagram of the globe 
on a sheet of paper, and take the whole size of one wall oi 
yotir chamber for the sun ; then draw your lines accordingly, 
that is if you can. 


i his tremendous exaggeration of the sun’s size is a mere 
theory of the astronomers, and is bound up with the whole 
hypothetical system. To make its reputed size at all har¬ 
monize with the theory, the astronomers have to push the 
sun away from the earth 92 millions of miles, or more, to 
make it look small enough ! This tremendous distance and 
size is the basis of their theory about sun spots. “ Spots ” 
indeed ! 

It is a gross misnomer, too, for the astronomers to call 
them sunspots, when they teach that they are thousands of 
miles wide. Holes so large, that as one of these scientists 
dedaies ‘‘the earth could easiiy drop in.” This same 
astronomer—Mr. Garrett P. Serviss—who has been writing 
to The American (New York), is reported to have said : 

“11 people had telescope eyes, so that they Could see at a yltutre 
things Hidden Irom all hut the astronomers, they would leave the 
most exciting occupation of life, and stand gazing with ante—if not 
with fenr —at the strange sights in the sun.” 

\ es, they want us to look with “ telescope eyes ” at these 
things, and not with the eyes which God has given us. If 
we were to look at a tiny insect with a telescope eye, or 
rather with a microscopic eye, we could IMAGINE it bigger 
than an elephant ; but the little thing would not alter its 
actual size, would it? 

It is this “telescope eye” which makes astronomers see 
in the sun “ an immense globe of blazing gas,” swaying the 
earth and the distant planets “as resistlessly as the ocean 
sways a floating chip ” ! The spots break out “ on the dis¬ 
torted face of the solar giant like black soot.” “ Their 
centres are yawning holes, many thousand miles in depth ” ! 
I hat is to the “telescope eye,” which magnifies depth as 
well as length and breadth. 

Is it not wonderful ? If we only had been created with 
“ telescope eyes. ’ But I think that the Creator of the world 
has done better for us, and given us natural eyes, wherewith 
we may see things in their natural proportions. 

And yet a weekly paper, of Jan. 14th, 1904, which pro¬ 
fesses to honour the Creator, and advocates the Seventh 
Day Sabbath as the memorial of Creation, publishes the 
above absurd sentence as “a sign of the times,” and pub¬ 
lishes it with signs of prophecy. 


Doubtless such teachings are a sign of the times in which 
we live ; when men, and even professed Christians, are de¬ 
parting from the old paths which were found d up n laiih 
in the Divine inspiration of the Bible. If the Bible be inspired, 
—and we believe it is—how can Christians consistently be¬ 
lieve such extravagant astronomical theories, in the face of 
the first chapter of Genesis, the second and fourth Com¬ 
mandments, and the many references to the order of Creation 
which are interspersed in the Word of God. But I must 
draw this article to a close. 

What I have tried to show is, that the globular theory is 
not consistent with known facts. And I have shown this 
especially in the last diagram by placing the sun where ob¬ 
jectors have thus put it. And even there we have shown 
that this agrees neither with astronomical theories nor with 
Zetetic facts. In short it is impossible to represent the 
globular system of the universe on paper at all, for its as¬ 
sumptions are so extravagant and outrageous that even the 
astronomers themselves cannot represent them in their own 
books. And what is more, it seems evident that they dare 
not make the attempt, lest their diagrams strike their readers 
as suspicious and preposterous. 


In Past and Future , for Feb., 1904, Mr. Dimbleby attacks 
what he is pleased to call “ the flat earth theory.” He says : 

“ The distance between Holy Head, in North Wales, and Kingston 
Harbour, just below Dublin, is 60 miles, but because, when a steamer 
is half-wav between these two places, the lighthorse of Holy Head 
could be seen through a telescope, Lady Blount says that the earth 
cannot be globular, insomuch as the top of the lighthouse should be 
almost COO feet below the level of the horizon. But distances of 30 
miles are seen in other places when a good elevation is secured. For 
example a person standing on the highest land of Jersey, in the Chan¬ 
nel Islands, a height of 300 feet, can see the Cathedral at Containes, 
in France, which is 30 miles distant.” 

Now if Mr. Dimbleby had seriously set his mind upon 
showing that our position was untrue, he should have shorvn 
that such long sights as the above could be seen on a glob- 



ular earth. That is, he ought to have attempted to show 
that the amount of curvature on such a globe as “ our earth ” 
is said to be is compatible with the above facts. But he 
conveniently ignores such a reasonable proceeding, and 
practically says, that because in other places besides the 
Irish Channel, distances of 30 miles can be seen, therefore 
the earth must be a globe ! 

This is a curious way of “ proving” globularity, but it is 
quite according to the Dimbleby style of argument. He 
simply asserts that “when a steamer is halfway between Dub¬ 
lin and Holyhead it IS on the brow of an arc, formed by the 
globular earth " ! t 

But we give the readers of Past and Future credit lor 
better perception than is implied in such a dictum ; especially 
as Mr. Dimbleby further adds that the “ telescope enlarges 
the perspective arc of the laws of vision.” Yet this writer 
rails at the “ pretentions of science,” for not admitting “ the 
truth of Biblical Chronology and speaks of the “ rigmarole 
of fictitious systems on time.” 

We think he should look to his own house. He refuses 
to believe the Bible doctrine that the earth is placed on 
“foundations, so that it cannot be moved.” In fact he 
teaches the opposite, and says that the “earth” travels 
through all the heavenly signs of the Zodiac ! And contends 
that this is taught in the holy Scriptures; and he tries to 
make them fit in with the idea that the earth is a whirling 
globe, flying through space like a shooting star. This is 
showm in the concluding paragraph of the above quotation, 
which reads as follows : “ the first chapter of Genesis con¬ 
tradicts the flat earth theory, otherwise how could the earth. 
arrive at the autumnal equinox, which is more north than 
the equator, on the fourth day?’’ 

I simply repeat the question Mr. Dimbleby raises, and I 
ask him to answer it himself; “ How could the earth arrive 
at the autumnal equinox” at all ? 

How, in fact, can the earth “arrive” at any place, much 
less the place of the autumnal equinox, when as the Bible 
declares, “ it cannot be moved ” ? Mr. Dimbleby not only 
contradicts Bible teaching respecting the immovability of 
the earth, but he fails to write in a clear and sensible man¬ 
ner. For instance, he asks " how could the earth arrive at 
the autumnal equinox, which is more north than the equator, 



on the fourth day ? ” That is, the autumnal equinox, accord¬ 
ing to this authority, is more north than the equator, on 
the fourth day ! How the earth ever could arrive at the 
equator passes our comprehension, much more its postulated 
arrival at the autumnal equinox, either on the fourth day, or 
any other day. But Mr. Dimbleby tries to make his readers 
believe that the first chapter of Genesis is responsible for 
such unreasonable and extravagant statements. 

It is the sun , according to the Bible and our senses, which 
arrives at the autumnal equinox, and that orb was created 
on the fourth day of Creation week ; but to talk of the earth 
“ arriving ” there, is not only subversive of all Bible teaching, 
but is contrary to all sound reason, history, and experience. 
Yet this writer professes that he accepts and supports Bible 
inspiration and science ! 

To be consistent men ought to give up either the Bible 
or that science, falsely so-called, which is in opposition to 
it. But, alas ! many minds are crippled by the spirit of 
inconsistency : and the absence of a true logical faculty is 
strangely prevalent in all classes of minds. We cannot 
account for this sad affliction. 

But strangely charged with mystery are many things by 
which we are closely surrounded is a truism that may at times 
strike us with deep force ; this is the experience of the 
writer, who has been led to exclaim : 

Ah ! strange life’s conditions. 

And strange men’s reliance. 

In “priestly” physicians 
And nebular science : 

And strange Truth and Knowledge, 

In church, chapel, and college, 

Are oft found with error 
And evil things mixed ! 

But, nevertheless, let us ever endeavour to remember that 
“ all things work together for good, to them that love God.” 



By E. H. RICHES, LL.D., F.R.A.S., 

Member of the “London Mathematical Society,” 
late Cantab, etc. 

(1 continued from p. 31 5-) 

It may be found upon consideration, that the argument 
in favour of the rotundity of the earth, with respect to 
navigators sailing in the direction due east, or due west, 
returning in the opposite direction, will also apply, and 
equally well too in the case of the supposition that the earth’s 
surface is a plane. This can be easily understood and does 
not require any explanation or illustration. Since, therefore, 
this argument does apply in the case of the earth being a 
plane, does it follow that the argument, applying in the case 
of it being a globe, proves that it is a globe ? 

It has been noted by navigators that there is a certain 
gain and loss of time in the matter of sailing east and west. 
This fact has been cited as a proof of the rotundity of the 
earth, It may be observed, however, that this gain and 
loss of time will also appear in the case of the earth s surface 
being a plane. It is wrong, therefore, and unfair to affirm 
that this effect can only be produced in the case of the earth 
being a globe. 

There is a well known story told by many in support of 
the theory of the convexity of the earth’s surface, that two 
brothers, who were twins, when the)’ arrived at a certain age 
started in opposite directions with a view of circumnavigating 
the earth. They did so ; and upon their again meeting, it 
was found that one was older than the other by one day ! If 
this story be a fact, it is still no less a fact that the same 
thing might happen in the case of the earth being a plane. 
Hence it is hardly right to cite this story as a proof of the 
earth’s rotundity’. 

One great argument in support of the rotundity of the 
earth, with respect to the North Star is often quoted. It 
may be interesting briefly to notice this, and endeavour to 
see if the argument be a strong one or not. The north polar 
star (Polaris) is supposed to hang, so to speak, immediately’ 
over the North Pole. Navigators have observed that this 
star appears gradually to approach the horizon, as they 



proceed towards the equator, receding from the north ; and 
because this star vanishes upon their arriving at the equator, 
it is argued that the earth’s surface must be convex. 

It is a known fact in optics, that, as the space between the 
observer, and the thing observed, increases, the thing ob¬ 
served becomes smaller, and its height diminishes. This may 
also be noticed at any time, by observing a tall tree, 01- 
church spire, &c., the distance between the object and the 
observer will be seen to vary. If any tall object be sighted 
on a plane, it will be observed, that, as the observer recedes 
from it, its height will gradually diminish, and at a sufficients 
ly great distance the angle of sight^now very small, will 
ultimately vanish altogether. 

By the same rule the apparent height of Polaris will dim¬ 
inish, and at a certain distance it will be lost to sight, by 
this simple truism in optics. It may be seen, therefore, that 
though Polaris vanishes in the case of the surface over which 
the observer is receding being convex, still it would also re¬ 
cede in the case of that same surface being a plane. But 
we now arrive at a very interesting point with reference to 
to the observation of the North Star. If the North Star be 
placed where we have supposed it to be, and the surface of 
the earth be of the exact convex form that we have supposed 
it to be, then it would be an impossible thing for this star 
to be seen from any place south of the equator ; for the line 
of sight from any point south of the equator must of neces¬ 
sity go off at a tangent to the sphere, and, in that case must 
fail to reach the North Star. This seems evident, and must 
be acknowledged to be so. It is curious therefore to note 
the several accounts that have come to us at different times 
of this North Star having been seen from the south side of 
the equator. How it is possible seems difficult to say, if the 
sphericity of the earth exists, as the Copernician and New¬ 
tonian theory tells us that it does. 

All communications and enquiries respecting this Magazine and the teaching it. 
upholds, and all questions and matter for insertion, should he addressed t j 
E.A.M.B 11, Gloucester Road, Kingston HitL 


The Ed. docs not necessarily endorse statements made under the headings of The 
Earth's ObservatoryLetters, etc,, unless signed Ed. 7 'he Earth. 




The annexed drawing was made especially for The Earth by an artist who, in 
1892. drew in pencil t! e view from nature. The mountain represented is one 
of the Andes, in Venezuela (S. America). The distance from the end of the 
mountains to Ucuare is about 20 miles. The mountain referred to is 400 metres m 

above the level of the sea ; the highest point of the range is 500 metres. The ■ 

distance from Maiketia (which is less than 10 feet above the level of the sea) to 1 

Ucuare is 100 miles). The mountains—which can be clearly seen from Maiketia ■ 

mountain—are 80 miles distant at the Ucuare end. If the earth were a globe W 

the amount of curvature would prevent the mountain being seen at a distance \ t 

of 50 miles. When the height of an observer is 10 feet his line of sight would 
be a tangent at a distance of about 4 miles. This gives about 1,411 feet for the 
dip. Taking the height of the lower peak at 400 metres, or 1312 English feet, 
the peak of the mountain would be below the horizon about 99 feet. And taking 
the higher peak, 500 metres, or 1640 feet, and subtracting the dip for 46 miles, 
namely 1,411, this mountain point would be above the line of sight about 229 
feet. So that the lower peak would be about 2539 feet below the line of sight 
if the earth were a globe ; and similarly the higher peak would be about 2,211 
feet below the line of sight. But as both peaks have been seen and drawn by 
my friend under the conditions named, this affords another clear proof that the 
earth is not a globe such as the astronomers hypothecate. 


If the eaith he a globe there can be no doubt that the air, or atmosphere, 
must rotate with it. 

When travelling by the train, at the rate of 40 or 50 miles an hour, we have 
doubtless, on putting our head or hand out of the window of the carriage, felt 
and been surprised at the force and resistance of the air, and wondered what 
the force and resistance of the air would he if “ the earth’s swift and numerous 
motions,” were a fact. 

Could any conceivable thing resist the tremendous force of these “ orbital 
and axial motions ” ascribed to the earth ? 

Could anything stay on the earth, light or heavy ; the mountains or hills ; 
the seas or oceans; even the air, and things floating in the air ? Nay. Nothing 
could possibly abide nor find a resting place upon it, if the earth and air u'ere in 

But notwithstanding all this, how can we account for the wind blowing in op¬ 
position to the earth’s motion, and in every direction under heaven, carrying 
smoke, and dust, even the air itself, and very light and heavy things, and sub¬ 
stances that can float or move with the air ? 

Of course, this is not all that could be said upon the subject; many 
proofs can be found, and various arguments can be produced. But there is 
only one thing to account for such an anomaly, and that is that the earth is not 
a globe, and has no motion at all. 

And the truth of God’s Word comes out clearly and unshaken, that God has 
fixed the pillars of the earth, and established the earth that it cannot be moved— 
and that it has foundations, and that its Byilder and Maker is God. 

Feb. 2nd, 1904. “TRUTH.” 

11 Extracts from an article, entitled 

W J ASTRONOMY OF THE BIBLE : by Prof. Lewis Swift, F.R.A.S. 

“ The Bible is not a work on astronomy.” [Bible astronomy is the onlytrue 
astronomy.—Ed.] The sun is one grei-t reservoir of heat and light to the earth, 
and yet, strictly speaking, neither comes from there ; nothing in fact, but cold 
dark waves of the all pervading ether. How can heat reach us from the sun, 
passing as it must through 93,000,000 miles of space, probably a hundred de¬ 
grees below zero ? 

“These waves pass through space without healing or lighting it, and plunge 
into our atmosphere without healing or lighting that except slightly ; but when 
they strike the earth and are reflected quicker, if possible, than a flash of light- 




ning, they are transformed into both beat and light. Light is the most rapid 
moving principle in nature, equal to 186,300 miles a second, or, while a person 
would say the words 1 Christian Herald/ it would revolve seven-and-a-half times 
arouud the earth. 

“ I advise the reader to stop a moment, and reflect on what is involved in 
the mighty idea of a circuit of seven times and-a-haK in one second. Light 
reaches us from the moon in one-and-three-fourth seconds; from d e sun in eight 
minutes ; from the nearest star in four years; from the Pole Star in forty-eight 
years ; and from ihe most distant stars, that our great telescopes can see like 
atoms of diamond dust floating in the sunbeams, the light must have been many 
thousand years on its journey. 

There are other waves which are a blessing to the human race ; waves of 
sensation, which move very slowly, only about 100 feet in a second, producing 
pain, and taste, and smell, and pleasure, and hatred, and love, &c , but no taste 
or pain is felt till the waves reach the brain. If a babe, in its cradle, had an arm 
93,000,000 miles long, and should insert its 6nger in the sun it would not know 
that its finger was burned until after the lapse of 140 sears.” 

[This “ babe ” illustration—after Sir R. Ball’s style—is too babyish ! My space 
is too precious for me to insert any more of this fallacious rubbish. Never¬ 
theless, I am grateful to Mr. H. Murray Bing for his kindness in copying out 
the article and sending it from America.—Ed.] 


T. II. A, queries the statement made in The Earth for December and January, 
p. 307, respecting the shining of the sun at places south of the equator; and 
he informs me that a friend of his—the captdn of a steamer loading at Rosario, 
in the Argentine Republic—had been observing the different limes of the day; 
and he writes under date, January 26th, 1904 : 

“ I cfcn’t say I have seen the sun shine on the south side of the houses; in 
fact, I can’t see how it is possible in tl is latitude, for the sun rises E S E, due 
North at noon, and sets about WS W. On Midsummer day one could almost 
say it shines all round ; for the sun is nearly right above you in this latitude, 
so that the houses throw no shadow whateAer.” 

Though this is apparently neutral evidence in respect to the sun shining on 
the south side of buildings, yet T.H.A. says the writer seems to confirm what 
Mr. Cook, of Perth Obseruatorv, W. Australia, writes, viz : “ that in the early 
morning, and late afternoon, the sun shines upon the south side of buildings 
between September 23rd and March 21st, at places more than 23^ degrees south 
of the equator; the sun never shines on the south side at mid-day. At places 
between the equator and latitude 23£ degrees S, the sun shines on the south 
wall throughout the day at midsummer (December).” 

LH,A. says his friend’s statement appears to be at variance with the words 
printed on p. 301 in The Earth, viz : “ The sun, without doubt, sets away to 
the northward, and not southerly, nor due west, as it would do on a globe,” etc. 
1 his is-an excerpt taken from an article on the “An'arctic Expedition,” and 
is in keeping with the context,, and with what actuallv occurs. The evidence 
of our senses tells us that the motion of the sun is a visible reality—for if it be 
observed from any latitude a few degrees 1 oith of the tropic of Cancer, and for 
any period before or after the time of southing, i.e.,passing the meridian, it will 
be seen to describe an arc of a circle. By way of illustration : if I watch the 
sun s progress on any day during the summer months, say at the head of the 
new pier Rt Brighton, the sun’s first appearance above the horizon will be ob¬ 
served to be at a point considerably to the north of East, or a line drawn at 



right angles to north and south, and il will be seen to ascend in a curve south¬ 
wards until it reaches the meridian, thence descending in a westerly curve until 
it arrives at the horizon, setting considerably to the north of West, not southerly 
or due west, as it would do on a globe. 

T. H. A. is exercised in his mind with reference to the remark on p. 19 of my 
pamphlet, Celestial Phenomena. He does not see how the stars characteristic of 
the southern and northern parts of the earth can revolve round their respective 
centres, and yet that the Southern Cross should be visible from every known 
and habitable point of the southern hemisphere. 

Mr. Cook, writing from the Government Observatory, Perth, W.A., says : 
“ there is a point in our sky round which all stars appear to revolve. There is 
not any star in this exact spot ; but there is a small star (Sigma Octantis) situ¬ 
ated very close to this spot, closer, in fact, than your Polaris is to your North 
Celestial Pole. The sun and moon always appear to revolve round this point 
the whole year through. Of course some allowance must be made for their 
gradual change in declination : i.e., their motion is more in the form of a spiral.” 

T. H. A. asks : “ If the constellation called the Southern Cross revolves round 
its own centre, and that not the same as the northern centre, how can the south¬ 
ern Cross he seen, say at the opposite side of the plane earth?” Mr. Cook 
says that three stars of the Southern Cross never set; the fourth just goes below 
the southern horizon for a short time each day. The altitude of the South Pole 
is exactly the same as the latitude of the observer’s locality, and if the distance 
of a star from the Pole exceeds this, the star will be below the horizon at its 
lowest transit. Thus in Cossack, lat. 20 deg. 40 min. S., the whole of the Cross 
will disappear as it swings round below the pole. The circum-polar constella¬ 
tions (meaning those which never set) depend upon the latitude of the observer. 
Octans, Ihe constellation in which the Pole is situated, is truly circumpolar to 
ns in Perth : i.e., all its stars are constantly above the horizon, or in sight at 
night time ; each star describing a circle daily round the pole.” But Mr. Cook 
makes this admission : “ I do not know where the south magnetic pole is situ¬ 
ated. We hope to find this out upon the return of the Antarctic Expedition.” 

Mr. Cook writes from a globularist standpoint ; at the same time I believe 
in his honesty of purpose ; and I am much indebted to him for photos of instru¬ 
ments used in making plain the astronomical instructions given in the supple¬ 
ment to the Education Circular; when he tells us how to find the sun’s path 
in the sky for a particular day, and how to find a point in the sky which is the 
centre of the circle, it appears to me that he is describing a moving sun— not an 
earth moving round the sun—for to speak of the sun’s path implies that the 
sun moves in that path ; in fact he heads paragraph 16 with these words : 


In this paragraph we are informed that when the sun’s position in respect to 
the stars is measured by special instruments, it is found that the sun is 
steadily moving eastward among the stars, taking exactly a year to complete one 
revolution. I accept this statement as the statement of. a matter of fact. If the 
sun appears to move, as astronomers confess it does so appear, why should we 
not believe that it does actually move ? Some reasons ought to he given. 

A greatly esteemed friend much desires that die kind account of myself (The 
Ed.) and my work in connection with The Earth , which appeared, with ray 
portrait, in Home Chat and other papers, shall be reprinted in The Earth. And 
a great many others have made the same request; but I regret that 1 must dis¬ 
appoint my kind friends, as lack of space alone would preclude the possibility 
of doing so. 

A mining engineer, just home from Columbia, S. America, amongst oilier 
thftigs told me, that the cutting through Panama for the canal revealed the facl 
3/2 that the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans were on precisely the same level, and that 
no locks were required for the canal. He also told me that he had travelled 
800 miles down a river in Colombia in an open boat, and that there was no 
danger from cataracts—but only from Alligators. He says that he has travelled 
all over the world, and. that the countries are smaller than represented on the 
globe. K. E M. 

Dear Lady Blount ,—The Earth to hand yesterday. 1 have greedily devoured 
its contents with much pleasure on the one hand and disgust on the other ; for 
the quotations from “ scientific writings ” cause me indigestion accompanied 
with nausea. 

The heading of your review of the Rev. G. T. Manley’s pamphlet struck a 
chord in my breast, for it is so closely allied to what I have been thinking about 
this past week—viz : fntellectualism —that I feel I must give vent to my thoughts 
in a letter to your esteemed self. The worship of Scripture-contradicting 
“science” by professed Christians, is a repulsive malady comparable to gan¬ 
grene in living tissues, spoken of in “The Scriptures of Truth” as “the 
plague of leprosy.”—Lev. xiii. 

What an array of names is given us in this February Earth. I notice that all 
those names represent many gods of speculative science so-called. But God has 
decreed that “ every knee shall bow, and tongue confess that Jesus Christ is 
Lord.” Have the persons represented by those names, and who have immor¬ 
talized them on the pages of “the history of science,” ever thought that this 
literal statement by the Holy Spirit applies to them as much as it does 
to all other men ? And when the time comes, as come it will, that an 
account of the things done and said in this mortal earth-body shall be presented ; 
what will these “ great men of the eart' the “mighty men of intellect” say 
to that Master-minded Zetetic, to whom God has committed all things?—John 
v. 22 ; Rev. vi. 15-17. 

Now as to Mr. J. B. Dimbleby’s statements respecting “ the earth’s rotation 
before a fixed sun,” and his attempted justification of that speculation by an 
appeal to the first chapter of Genesis, I should like to ask, is it possible that 
he is absolutely blind to facts? Is he so far unacquainted with the weighing 
of evidence that he does not perceive the illogical dilemma he places himself in ? 

If, as Sir Isaac Newton affirmed, “the sun is the centre of the solar system, 
and immovable.” how could the day and i ight be formed, or caused, by earth 
rotation before it, when it was not made ? How, then, in the name of common 
sense can earth rotation be found either actually, tacitly, or implied in Gen. i. 

5 ? The Bible was not written to teach or support in any way the phantasmal 
astronomy taught in our schools to-day. Modern astronomy is only a baby in 
long clothes, and I am sure it will not live much longer, seeing that “ the Judge 
standeth at the door.” 

I notice that he prefaces his rigmarole bv saying, “there are several astron¬ 
omical facts, known to us, which are not mentioned in the Bible.” But z>hat 
is an “ astronomical fact ” ? It is only a supposition put forth to explain 
phenomena as best mfen can ! ” 

Mr. Dimbleby says he is of opinion that the revolution and rotation of the 
earth are clearly taught in the first chapter of Genesis. I defy his statements, 
and challenge his power (or any other’s) to prove his assertion by any logical 
process whatever. In Gen. i. 4, it is written that, “ God divided the light 
from the darkness.” That was evidently daylight, for the sun was not made 
then. Modern astronomy dares to give God the lie by asserting that the “sun 
is the source of all light. The Heavens , by Guillemin, edited by Professor J. 
Norman Lockver. F. R.A.S., p. 15. The man (I rare not who he be) that 
believes that “ astronomical fact ” to be true, cannot believe the first chapter of 
Genesis to be true. J. WILLIAMS. 


VOL. IV. Nos. 47 & 48. 


“ The planetary system,’’ said Humboldt, in its relation of 
absolute magnitude, relative position of the axis, density, 
time of rotation, and different degrees of eccentricity of the 
orbits, “ has, to our apprehension, nothing more of natural 
necessity than the relative distribution of land and water on 
the surface of our globe , the configuration of continents, or 
the elevation of mountain chains.” No general law in these 
respects, is discoverable either in the regions of space or in 
the irregularities of the crust of the earth. 

The foregoing describes, in Humboldt’s language, the 
condition of the orthodox planetary system of his da}'. 
These remarks apply with equal force to the teachings of 
present-day astronomers of the globular school who call 
themselves scientists (from scio : “ 1 know,”) science (sciens : 
“knowledge”). But orthodox astronomy is admittedly a 
theory , founded upon speculation ; and the moment specu¬ 
lation becomes knowledge then speculation ceases. There¬ 
fore, it is a misnomer to designate such theoretical astron¬ 
omers “ scientists.” On the other hand “ plane-earthists ” 
denominate themselves “Zetetics,” from the Greek zeteo: 
“I seek, search for, investigate, inquire into”; zetetes: 
“searcher, inquirer.” Zetetics are, consequent!}', those who 
do n >t take for granted the theories which may be offered 
to them, but make investigations to see whether these things 
be true or not, and, if not, to endeavour to arrive at the truth. 
They therefore investigate the common statement that “ die 
earth is round or spherical, like a ball or an orange, because 
ships have actual!}' and repeated!}- made the circuit of the 
globe.' ’ They naturally ask: “Are these deductions in 
accordance with facts ? ” Vessels and steamers continually 
■go round the Isle of Wight and the Isle of Man ; therefore, 
if the earth be a “ globe” “ because vessels and steamers go 
round it,” then (by the same line of reasoning) the Isle of 

A mining engineer, just home from Columbia, S. America, amongst other 
things told me, that the cutting through Panama for the canal revealed the fact 
3/J that the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans were on precisely the same level, and that 
no locks were required for the canal. He also told me that he had travelled 
800 miles down a river in Colombia in an open boat, and that there was no 
danger from cataracts—but only from Alligators. He says that he has travelled 
all over the world, and that the countries are smaller than represented on the 
globe. ft. ft m. 

Dear Lady Blomit,— The Earth to hand yesterday. I have greedily devoured 
its contents with much pleasure on the one hand and disgust on the other ; for 
the quotations from “ scientific writings ” cause me indigestion accompanied 
with nausea. 

The heading of your review of the Rev. G. T. Manley’s pamphlet struck a 
chord in my breast, for it is so closely allied to what I have been thinking about 
this past week—viz : Jntellectnalism —that I feel I must give vent to my thoughts 
in a letter lo your esteemed self. The worship of Scripture-contradicting 
“ science ” by professed Christians, is a repulsive malady comparable to gan¬ 
grene in living tissues, spoken of in “ The Scriptures of Truth ” as “ the 
plague of leprosy.”—Lev. xiii. 

What an array of names is given us in this February Earth. I notice that all 
those names represent many gods of speculative science so-called. But God has 
decreed that “ every knee shall bow, and tongue confess that Jesus Christ is 
Lord.” Have the persons represented by those names, and who have immor¬ 
talized them on the pages of “the history of science,” ever thought that this 
literal statement by the Holy Spirit applies to them as much as it does 
to all other men ? And when the time comes, as come it will, that an 
account of the things done and said in this mortal earth-body shall be presented ; 
what will these “ great men of the earth,” the “ mighty men of intellect” say 
to that Master-minded Zetetic, to whom God has committed all things ?—John 
v. 22 ; Rev. vi. 15-17. 

Now as to Mr. J. B. Dimblebv’s statements respecting “ the earth’s rotation 
before a fixed sun,” and his attempted justification of that speculation by an 
appeal to the first chapter of Genesis, I should like to ask, is it possible that 
he is absolutely blind to facts? Is he so far unacquainted with the weighing 
of evidence that lie does not perceive the illogical dilemma he places himself in ? 

If, as Sir Tsaac Newton affirmed, “the sun is the < entre of the solar system, 
and immovable.” how could the day and i ight he formed, or caused, by earth 
rotation before it, when it was not made ? How, then, in the name of common 
sense can earth rotation be found either actually, tacitly, or implied in Gen. i. 

5 ? The Bible was not written to teach or support in any way the phantasmal 
astronomy taught in our schools to-day. Modern astronomy is only a baby in 
long clothes, and I am sure it will not live much longer, seeing that “ the Judge 
standeih at the door.” 

I notice that he prefaces his rigmarole bv saying, “ there are several astron¬ 
omical facts, known to us, which are not mentioned in the Bible.” But z’hat 
is an “astronomical fact”? It is only “a supposition put forth to explain 
phenomena as best mfen can ! ” 

Mr. Dimbleby says he is of opinion that the revolution and rotation of the 
earth are clearly taught in the first chapter of Genesis. I defy his statements, 
and challenge his power {or any other’s) to prove his assertion by any logical 
process whatever. In Gen. i. 4, it is written that, “ God divided the light 
from the darkness.” That was evidently daylight, for the sun was not made 
then. Modern astronomy dares to give God the lie by asserting that the “sun 
is the source of all light. The Heavens , by Guillemin, edited by Professor J. 
Norman Lockyer. F. R.A.S.. p. 15. The man (I care not who he be) that 
believes that “ astronomical fact ” to be true, cannot believe the first chapter of 
Genesis to be true. J. WILLIAMS. 


Vol. IV. Nos. 47 & 48. 


“The planetary system,’’ said Humboldt, in its relation of 
absolute magnitude, relative position of the axis, density, 
time of rotation, and different degrees of eccentricity of the 
orbits, “has, to our apprehension, nothing more of natural 
necessity than the relative distribution of land and water on 
the surface of our globe, the configuration of continents, or 
the elevation of mountain chains.” No general law in these 
respects, is discoverable either in the regions of space or in 
the irregularities of the crust of the earth. 

The foregoing describes, in Humboldt’s language, the 
condition of the orthodox planetary system of his da)-. 
These remarks apply with equal force to the teachings of 
present-day astronomers of the globular school who call 
themselves scientists (from scio: “ I know,”) science ( sciens : 
“knowledge”). But orthodox astronomy is admittedly a 
theory, founded upon speculation ; and the moment specu¬ 
lation becomes knowledge then speculation ceases. There¬ 
fore, it is a misnomer to designate such theoretical astron¬ 
omers “ scientists.” On the other hand “ plane-earthists ” 
denominate themselves “Zetetics,” from the Greek setto : 
“1 seek, search for, investigate, inquire into” ; deletes: 
“ searcher, inquirer." Zetetics are, consequently, those who 
do 11 it take for granted the theories which may be offered 
to them, but make investigations to see whether these things 
be true or not, and, if not, to endeavour to arrive at the truth. 
They therefore investigate the common statement that “ the 
earth is round or spherical, like a ball or an orange, because 
ships have actually and repeatedly made the circuit of the 
globe!' The)- naturally ask : “ Are these deductions in 
accordance with facts ? ” Vessels and steamers continually 
•go round the Isle of Wight and the Isle of Man ; therefore, 
if the earth be a “ globe” “ because vessels and steamers go 
round it,” then (by the same line of reasoning) the Isle of 

374 THE EARTH : is it a globe. 

Wight and the Isle of Man are globes because vessels con¬ 
tinually go round them. Now we have positive evidence, 
founded upon personal knowledge, that the Isle of Wight 
and the Isle of Man are not globes ; hence it follows that 
the earth is not necessarily a globe because ships have gone 
round it. 

“ If the earth is flat, when we go to the edge we may 
tumble over.” 

We have been met by this surmise so many times that 
we feel it is what comes naturally to the mind of the ord¬ 
inary man, or woman, who has been brought up in the 
belief that the earth is suspended in space and, therefore, if 
it were a plane there would be the danger of our walking 
over the edge, and falling into space. But no one has been 
able to get to the edge. Beyond a certain point in the 
Antarctic regions God has not yet permitted men to go; 
therefore, no one has been placed in such a position 
where it would be possible to “ tumble over.’’ Com¬ 
mander R. F. Scott, R.N., and his party of explorers— 
who sailed from New Zealand in December, 1901, 
have undoubtedly penetrated further into the interior of 
extreme southern regions than any previous explorers, and 
after three years of courageous exploration their description 
of the furthest limits of the unknown continent is, that it was 
“ found to be a bleak plateau, rising 9,000 feet above the 
sea, and stretching interminably to the south.” 

In travelling east or west we go round a centre. In 
going due south vve may make for a certain point ; but the 
voyager, when he has pushed his way as far as possible 
beyond all known land is stopped by mountains of ice ; and 
he finds himself beyond the regular influence of the sun’s 
rays, or 11 beyond the limits of light and darkness.” And it 
is clearly evident that no man could possibly continue to 
travel due south much further than Commander R. F. Scott, 
reached, because he could not exist far beyond the limits of 
the sun’s rays.” 

Zetetics when instituting inquiries as to the form of the 
earth, and the phenomena which pertain to the world 01- 
all that they can see, are met by a number of questionable 
theories, but on examining the rationale of these theories, 
which need examination, I shall as far as possible, use plain 


On the threshold of the argument as to the earth not 
being a globe, we are told that wherever we look—either 
skyward or seaward—there is an appearance of an arc or the 
segment of a circle. Ships disappear and come in sight as 
if they were moving over a sphere—and it is asked : “ Can 
we trust our senses?” Truth replies: “Yes;” but it is 
necessary that we should not allow our God-given senses to 
be deceived either by men or demons. 

There are men living, people calling themselves “ scien¬ 
tists,” who would have us believe that they can fathom and 
define the ways of Eternal Providence better than God 
Himself—and have them “ set in a note, learned and conned 
by rote,” to cast in the teeth of all who would dare to think 
otherwise. They love to get hold-of “ a principle,” to use 
their own language, and push it home to its ultimate con¬ 
clusion. That is being thorough according to their form of 
judgment. It is being consistent, and they worship con¬ 
sistency. The)- echo the words of one of Shakespeare’s 
characters : 

“ Consistency, thou art a jewel ! ’’ 

It docs not occur to these people that it is more im¬ 
portant that their deductions shall not be false to facts, 
and that consistency in pursuing a fixed course which has 
diverged from good common sense and sound reasoning, is 
wrong-heade 1 and guilty error. They will not admit that, 
as a matter of fact, there are even very few wise general 
principles that are universally' true in the sense that they' 
can be made into rigid rules ; hence the necessity of bring¬ 
ing all theories to the tests of experience and experiments, 
and the danger of leaning on general rules for the under¬ 
standing of the great problems of the world. 

The theory' that the earth is a globe, whizzing through 
space at the rate of 63,000 miles every hour, with main- 
additional motions, is based upon an assumption in direct 
opposition to our God-given senses. If the earth moves at 
this extraordinary- speed, how is it that we do not perceive 
that it moves ? The pseudo-scientists being wedded to the 
globular theory, instead of reconsidering their deductions, 
provide 11s with figures the magnitude of which no intellect 
can grasp, and the great majority' accept their dicta because 
it is considered “the proper thing to do.” 


If we travel by land or sea from any part of the earth in 
the direction of any meridian line, and towards the northern 
central star Polaris, we come to a region of ice, where the 
star, which has acted as our guide, is vertical to our position, 
i.e. : directly above us. This is not necessarily the centre 
of the earth. We may describe it as a vast lake sea, about 
1,000 miles in diameter, surrounded by an immense barrier 
of ice close upon a hundred miles in breadth. From this 
region we can trace outlines of lands which project from it, 
and the surfaces of which are above the water—and we see 
it demonstrated that the present form of the earth (“ dry 
land ” as distinguished from the waters of the -l great 
deep”) partakes of an irregular mass of islands, capes, and 
bays, terminating in huge bluffs (or headlands) projecting in 
a direction away from the north, and principally towards the 
south ; and this is in accordance with the teaching of the Holy 
Scriptures. By sailing with our backs continually to the cen¬ 
tral star Polaris we arrive at another region of ice ; in fact,upon 
whatever meridian we sail (keeping north behind us) we shall 
be ultimately checked in our progress by vast cliffs of ice 
acting as barriers. There is evidently a boundary of ice en¬ 
circling the southern seas, with inegular masses of land 
stretching out towards the south, engirdled by packs of ice 
and frozen barriers, the depth and breadth, and whole extent 
of which have not been ascertained. How far the ice extends 
has not, even by the recent Discovery expedition, been ap¬ 
proximately discovered. The earth and sea’s extremity has 
not been penetrated by the most powerful telescope yet 
invented, and the “ beyond ” is still hidden in gloom and 
darkness from the human eye. 

\\ hat the superficial extent or magnitude of the earth is, 
from northern regions to the south, can only be indefinitely 
stated so far as actual measurement is concerned. Of 
course we know that, in 1866, in laying the Atlantic 
cable from the Great Eastern steamship, the distance from 
Yalentia, on the S.W. coast of Ireland, to Trinity Bay 
in Newfoundland, was ascertained to be 1665 miles, and we 
before knew that the longitude of Y 7 alentia is io° 30' Y\\, 
and Trinit}- Bay 53 0 30'W, 43 0 representing the difference 
of longitude between the two places, and the whole distance 
round the earth being divided into 360°, if 43 0 are 1665 
nautical miles (equal to 1916 statute miles) then 360° will 
be equal to 13,834 nautical miles (15957 statute miles). 



(A Review.) 

The above is the title of a book which has lately been 
published. Although the writer of this book is a globularist, 
he differs from the" teaching of orthodox Newtonianism in 
such a marked manner, that Zetetics can but welcome it 
because of its reasonableness. It deals with that which has 
been a most difficult problem to many, viz : “ What is the 
actual size of the sun ? ” 

The book is written with clearness and common-sense, 
the matter being put in a reasonable form. 1 he object of 
the writer is to prove that the actual size of the sun corres¬ 
ponds with the geographical area of vertical solar rays, and 
we are reminded that the troops engaged in the South 
Afriean War, leaving the south coast of England in north 
latitude about 50", were carried to Cape town in south latitude 
33 0 , a distance of over 5,000 geographical miles. 

Sailing over the northern tropic they crossed the equator, 
sailed over the southern tropic and into the south temper¬ 
ate zone ; when the officers of the transport took their daily 
observations of the sun’s altitude it was noticed that the sun 
bore south and that the spectator’s shadow was projected 
north. After a few days, the sun still bore south, but at a 
higher degree of altitude, and the shadow projected north 
was shorter. The sphere of the heavens seemed slowly to 
rotate from east to west, the northern constellations seeming 
to sink lower and lower in the heavens, new constellations 
appearing above the southern horizon. In about a week 
after leaving England the transport arrived near the tropics, 
a zone (or belt) circling at 23^° of latitude on either side 
of the equator. On some parallel of latitude in this zone 
the sun is vertical— i.e., the sun at noon is in the zenith. 
Whenever that particular parallel is passed the sun’s position 
is passed. 

A quotation is made from a newspaper correspondent, who 
wrote : “ On that Sunday we passed to the south of the sun. 
At noon on that day the ship was in Latitude i4 0 30' north, 


and the sun in latitude 14 0 28'. Henceforth we were to 

look at him.with our back to the south instead of north.” 

Here at noon the ship was in the area of vertical rays ; the 
sun was in the zenith, and the spectator’s shadow was pro¬ 
jected downwards, and hence invisible ; but by the next noon 
the ship passed south of the area, the bearing of the sun 
and the projection of the shadow being reversed— i.e., 
instead of viewing the sun with the back to the north, it was 
viewed with the back to the south. 

If (as has been stated) the volume of the sun is 1,407,000 
times that of the earth—how would it be possible for an ob¬ 
server on the earth’s surface to pass the position of the sun 
as recorded by Dr. Robertson ? The utter impossibility is 
self-evident, and it is palpable that compared with the earth’s 
magnitude, the sun is a small body. The doctor 
demonstrates that the whole area of the sun is contained within 
32 miles. The appearances observed in passing the sun’s 
position are somewhat similar to those seen when we pass 
beneath an electric lamp in the street. If the direction in 
w hich one passes under one of these lamps be from north 
to south it will be observed that when north of the lamp’s 
position, the light will be seen to bear south and our shadow 
to be projected northward ; when immediately beneath it 
the light will be in the zenith, and the shadow projected 
downwards—being thus invisible ; but, having passed the 
position of the light, we must turn round in order to 
see it, i.e,, “ face it ”—for it bears north and our shadow 
is projected southward. Now whatever be the physical con¬ 
stitution of a self-luminous body, the rays of light emitted 
by that bod} - arc propogated in straight lines in every di¬ 
rection from every part of the luminous surface so long as 
the rays of light traverse the same medium. Whenever a 
luminous body illuminates an opaque surface there must 
always be an area of central {i.e., perpendicular) or vertical 

Proceeding on the lines of Euclid, which no mathematician 
can deny to be based on true mathematical principles, 
Dr. Robertson proceeds to fully demonstrate by diagrams 
that the diameter of the area of vertical rays must always 
be equal to the diameter of the luminous body. The author 
thus has grasped the very essence of what we have thought 
for years, and that is : “ The real size of the sun may be 



found in the area of vertical solar rays.” My meaning might 
be made a little more explicit by representing a globular 
body thus : 

a r . i> is 

Let S represent the sun, and E C and F D the vertical 
rays of light falling upon the plane earth, A B. The vertical 
rays of the globular illuminated body of the sun would be 
represented by the straight lines continued down to C D. 
Now it is self-evident that C D is the diameter of the globu¬ 
lar bod} - S. The base A B on the outer sides of C D will 
receive the oblique rays, which rays are perceptibly oblique 
by their casting of shadows. 

There is a deflecting influence to which the other solar 
rays are liable in their passage to the earth, and that is 
atmospheric refraction ; but near and at the zenith it is so 



slight as to be practically non-existent. In endeavouring 
to find out the area of vertical solar rays, we are told that 
“ the ancient geographers found themselves considerably 
embarrassed in their attempt to fix the northern tropic, for 
though they took a very proper method, namely, to observe 
the most northerly place where objects had no shadow on a 
certain day—yet they found that on the same clay no shadow 
was cast for a space of no less than 300 stadia.”* 

Dr. Robertson says that the sun has a real annual orbit, 
and that it actually moves in the plane of the ecliptic ; con¬ 
sequently its size must be very small when compared with 
the earth. There is no evidence to show that the sun is of 
stupendous magnitude. The principle that ‘‘size is as the 
distance ” is applicable only to opaque bodies seen under 
equal illumination, and is totally inapplicable in the case of 
the sun, which is “ the great source of light.” 

In respect to eclipses, the author of this unique little book 
shows conclusively that they are not determined by the above 
supposed motions of the various orbs, though we very much 
question whether they are calculated on the basis of an orbital 
motion of the sun ; not that we doubt the sun’s orbital motion, 
but if they are so calculated, how did Regiomontanus calcu¬ 
late the exact time of an eclipse, at least twenty eight years 
before Columbus saw it in the West Indian Islands in 1 504 ? 
We contend that there is no calculation needed—simply 
keeping records of past eclipses, and watching for the recur¬ 
rence of eclipse cycles. 

We must do the Doctor justice by pointing out that he 
does not admit there is an orbital motion of the earth ; yet 
he says that ‘‘the apparent rotation of the celestial sphere” 
is a term used to denote that appearance, seen on a clear 

®The stadium was 630-93 feet, and y\ stadia were equivalent 
to a Roman mile which is equal to 4,732 English feet ; and 
300 stadia would be equal to 3 1 • 1 5 geographical miles. The 
apparent diameter of the sun, as measured on the sphere 
of the heavens, is given in the Nautical Almanac for March 
22nd, or September 23rd, as 32' 2", the average of the two 
observations. In the practice of nautical astronomy 32' of 
arc on the sphere of the heavens is equal to 32 geographical 
miles on the surface of the earth. 

night, when all the stars appear to move slowly from east to 
west, across the concave sphere containing all the heavenly 
bodies, slowly rotating round two fixed pivots or poles. 
Now this appearance can only have one of two possible 
interpretations— i.e., the celestial sphere is a real sphere 
containing all the heavenly bodies fixed in some mysterious 
manner, and actually rotates on the celestial poles, and an 
imaginary axis (termed the celestial axis) the earth remaining 
absolutely motionless in the centre—or : that the earth in a 
stationary position, has a motion of rotation on its own axis 
in an opposite direction, from west to east. Rut why does 
Dr. Robertson consider it impossible that the sun, moon, 
and stars could actually revolve round the earth every twenty- 
four hours ? Why should he interpret the apparent rotation 
of the celestial sphere to mean a real rotation of the earth 
in the opposite direction ? Of course we see the difficulty 
of his position by his retention of the view that the earth is 
a globe, partly because a ship disappears hull first (owing 
to a cause which we have explained many times) having 
nothing to do with the assumed rotundity of the earth’s 
su rface. 

However, personally, I am grateful to the author for his 
lucid explanation regarding his conclusions as to the actual 
size of the sun, and showing so clearly the utter fallaciousness 
of the popularly accepted theory. 

With the following interesting paragraphs, taken from one 
of the learned Dr.’s letters, I must conclude this short review : 

“ Modern Astronomy is divisible into two distinct parts or systems, 
which are not only 'different but directly antagonistic to each other. 
There is first, Practical Astronomy, with that most useful and important 
sub-division, usually called Nautical or Geographical Astronomy. This 
is the astronomy banded down to us from remote ages, and has been 
gradually and constantly improved during the lapse of centuries, until 
now it has reached a state of great perfection. Regarding the accuracy, 
indeed the extreme accuracy, of this system there can be no reasonable 
doubt, its practical problems are daily verified by thousands of indepen¬ 
dent observers.” 

“ The other system, which is variously termed by different authors, 
The Copernican, Newtonian, or Speculative Astronomy, is the astronomy 
of hypotheses. It was originated by Copernicus. It was his idea of how 
the Universe should have been made ; he thought that the lamp of the 
world, the sun, shortld be placed ‘ in the midst of the beautiful temple 
of nature, ruling the whole family of cir-ling stars that revolve round 
him.” No clo ibt this idea makes a very pretty little diagram on paper, 
which is about all that can be said in its favour. It assumes the sun to 



be stationary, whereas the first system assumes the sun to travel every 
hour in the ecliptic. The two systems accordingly, are in direct antag¬ 
onism. This system of hypotheses quite independent of facts, has 
gradually expanded since the time of Copernicus until now it has reached 
a pitch of extravagance which is truly wonderful.” 


A Reply. 

A “degree,” according to the Encyclopaedia Brilannica, is 
the 360th part of the circumference of a circle, which part is 
taken as the principal unit of measure for arcs and angles. 
The degree (°) is divided into 4 minutes of 60 seconds. 
Astronomers assume that the earth is a globe, and each 
360th part of a circle all round it is called a “ degree ; ” it is 
also assumed that the earth moves, though it is the sun 
which appears to do so. 

The position of the sun in regard to the earth's surface is 
changed one degree in four minutes; in other words: 15 
degrees per hour, and 180 degrees (or half the circumference 
of the earth) in 12 hours; hence the hour on a time-piece 
is divided into 60 minutes. The sun’s time \aries, but clock 
time does not vary. 

In regard, however, to the earth’s surface, we are told that 
the distance between parallels of latitude in different lati¬ 
tudes is not uniform, the length of the degree being greater 
at the equator than at the poles. 

The length of a degree perpendicular to the meridian has 
been computed and compared with the length of a meridional 
degree in the same latitude, giving the proportion of the 
poles to the equatorial axis. The result differed consider¬ 
ably from that obtained by meridional degrees. 

Degrees of longitude radiating from the North have been 
stated to gradually increase in extent as they approach the 
equator, beyond which they are again said to converge and 
gradually diminish in extent towards the south. This is 
the popularly accepted theory. 

The matter might be decided by measuring some distance 
to the south of the equator at right angles to a given meri¬ REES. 3 S 3 

dian (with non-expanding. rods), and between two points 
where the sun .is vertical at an interval of 4 minutes of solar 
ti me — i.e., as one degree is a 360th part of the sun’s whole 
path over the earth so is the period of 4 minutes a 360th 
part of the whole 24 hours, which the sun repuires to com¬ 
plete his course ; therefore, whatever space on the earth is 
contained between any two points (where the sun is on the 
meridian at 12 o’clock and 4 minutes past 12) will be one 
degree of longitude. If we know the approximate distance 
between any two places in the South, on or about the same 
latitude, we can calculate the length of a degree of longi¬ 

No shadow of doubt rests in my mind that the degrees 
South converge the same as they do in the North, so that 
the length of a degree South grows less as we go further 
from the equator. “ Parallax ” taught otherwise. I believe 
I have seen the quotation from his book, but have not read 
the work through. 

If meridians converge south of the equator (as I believe 
they do) then a degree would measure less at 30° south than 
at the equator. But taking the ratio of the supposed globe 
degrees at that distance, both north and south would be 
about 47 miles long. 

I have heard such scientists as decide these things admit 
that they are far from their measurements of degrees ; and I 
am convinced that no man has yet “ perceived the breadth 
of the earth,” nor measured it practically. 

The globular idea must be stamped out from a man’s mind 
before he can see things from a true position, and think of 
the sun’s rays, as he proceeds above his pathway in the 
heavens, falling upon and directly touching the earth’s sur¬ 
face so as to form a circle, and the extreme limits of his rays 
of light forming a larger circle within a larger circle, where 
sunlight comes to an end, and beyond the limits of day and 

NOTICE. — In the next issue of The Earth , we shall (D.Y.) 
give an illustration showing the photograph taken on the 
Old Bedford Canal, under circumstances recounted on 
another page of this issue. 








DISTANCE 6123456789 1 2 




The diagram now presented to my readers of The Earth , bears evidence 
that the earth is a plane, It has reference to the great ship canal which 
connects the Mediterranean Sea with the Gulf of Suez on the Red Sea ; 
Port Said (Egypt) being the entrance to the canal in that direction. 
The canal is ioo English statute miles in length, and is entirely without 
locks. The water within it is really a continuation of the Mediterranean 
Sea to the Red Sea. 

The average level of the Mediterranean is 6 inches above the Red 
Sea ; but the flood tides in the Red Sea rise 4 feet above the highest 
(and its ebb fall nearly 3 feet below the lowest) in the Mediterranean. 
The datum line is 26 feet below the level of the Mediterranean, and is 
continued horizontally from one sea to the other,and,throughout the whole 





, _ N- OO 


length of the canal the surface of the water runs parallel with this datum. 
The 100 miles of water in the canal and the surface of the Mediterranean 
Sea are a continuation of the same horizontal line. 

If the earth were globular the water at one end of a canal one hundred 
miles in length would be 1 mile 1380 feet below the other end. But who 
has seen such a fall in the Suez Canal, or any other long stretch of water ? 
No one. And who, but a globularist could believe in such a thing 
against all the evidence of known facts, and against the evidence of our 
God-given senses? 

This canal affords another illustration that the surface of the great 
waters of the earth are horizontal, and therefore, disproves The theory of 
the earth’s rotundity. 





The Daily Mail for April 2nd, 1904, contained an article 
(under the above heading) which had a special interest for 
those who believe in a plane and motionless earth, as the 
return of the Discovery in search of the “ South Pole” was 
professed to be described in a full narrative by Capt. Scott, 
R.N., Commander of the Antarctic Exploring Expedition, 
which sailed from New Zealand in December, 1901. 

From the account it appears that the Discovery , and the 
relief ships— Morning and Terra Nova —arrived at Lyttleton, 
N.Z., on April 1st, after voyaging 2}- years in the Antarctic 
regions. As the Expedition was assisted out of the National 
Exchequer, whatever facts may have been elicited ought to 
be made public. 

It may be stated for our readers’ information that it was 
in January, 1902 (six months after sailing from Cowes) that 
the Discovery entered the ice-field ; a month later, when 
2,000 miles south of New Zealand, she became gripped^ in 
the ice. This occurred in a region near the volcano Ere¬ 
bus, an active crater, named after the leading ship of the 
expedition commanded by Sir James Clarke Ross, about 60 
years ago. 

In that voyage the evidence pointed to the fact of the 
earth being a plane, the extremities of which are bounded by 
vast regions of ice and water, and irregular masses of land. 

I believe when a true plan of the earth is known, it will be 
found to have four “corners.’’ Three of them are known, 
and the fourth exists, possibly under the water. It has not 
yet been discovered. Mr. E. E. Middleton, I am convinced, 
is on the right track. 

That the sun’s path has been moving southwards in a con¬ 
centric course may reasonably account for the changes in 
temperature that must have taken place on portions of the 
earth’s surface, where remains of verdure that could only 
have existed in a different climate are found. We may note 
the discovery that certain specimens of flora found in the 
North polar regions exist in the southern ice fields. I he 
fossil remains of plants discovered by certain explorers, are 
thought to point to the fact that, at some period in the past, 
the now iev south was once warmer. At present, at the 


J Q / 

point to which the Discovery expedition penetrated, the 
mean temperature for the year is below' zero ; they once ex¬ 
perienced 100 degrees of frost. In such a locality scanty 
moss, with a few lichens, form the only plant life. 

When the explorers were sleighing through a blizzard, 
we are told that “ if their gloves were not securely fastened 
on, thej- would instantly be blown away” (!) This corroborates 
our personal conclusions, viz. : that the furthest south being 
beyond the vision of light and darkness—or day and night 
—is piercingly cold, and subject to boisterous winds, which 
sweep with intense force across the clashing icebergs. 

The narrative given in the above named paper, is, as far 
as it goes, favourable to the deduction that the earth rests 
upon and within the waters of the great deep, and that it is 
a floating island, or series of islands, buoyed up by the waters, 
and probably supported by submarine land connected with 
other land beneath the ice in the extreme south. 

Commander Scott, in describing his winter sojourn in the 
wild Antarctic regions of solitude, was most persevering in 
his attempt “to look on the frozen page of God, and see 
what the letters meant.” liy his sledge journeys into the 
interior of the unknown continent, he says, he has succeeded 
in finding it to be a bleak plateau (elevated plain) rising 
9,000 feet above the sea, “ and stretching interminably to the 
south." This goes far to put the stamp of proof upon what 
we have expressed as our belief in respect to what exists 
far south. 

Captain Scott, with Mr. Skelton and party, found a new 
route to the West, and established a depot 2,000 feet up the 
glacier, 60 miles from the ship. On October 6th, 1903, one 
section of the explorers started for the strait in lat. 80 S, 
and the)- found it contained a large glacier formed from the 
inland ice; and they obtained information as to the point of 
junction between the barrier-ice and the land. A depot, 
established the previous year, was found to have moved a 
quarter of a mile to the north. Six of the party reached a 
point 160 miles S E of the ship, travelling continuously over 
a level plain. No trace of land, and no obstacles in the ice 
were encountered, " and evidence was obtained showing 
this vast plain to be afloat.” 

When the part}- crossed the 80th parallel (for the first time 
in the world’s history) the compass pointed the wrong way. 


It is something to know that the expedition was within 500 
miles of the so-called “ South Pole,” and that all this way 
off the compass was reversed. 

During the return journey the Possession Islands were 
found to be more numerous than shown on the charts ; blit 
Wilke’s Land, Ring Gold Knoll, and other lands marked on 
the chart, were apparently not in existence ; and the Discovery 
sailed right over the spot where they were supposed to be 

When steaming along the great Ice Barrier, discovered 
by Sir James Clarke Ross in 1842, at the furthest easterly 
point Captain Scott discovered new land, which His Majesty 
has been pleased to have called after himself, viz. : “ King 
Edward VII. Land.” 

We may note that the Discovery , in settling down into 
winter quarters in February, 1902, was frozen in, “and 
endured a long dark winter, ivilh a night of 122 days, when 
the temperature fell to 62° below zero, and it was unsafe to 
venture from the ship, for even a mile, because of the blind¬ 
ing blizzard that raged almost continuously.” This quotation 
is an excerpt from the statement of Lieut. Shackleton, of the 
Discovery. “ Does the phrase, ‘a night of 122 days ’ mean 
that the sun was not seen for that long period ? ” was a 
question put to me ; and I replied, “ Certainly.” And as 
such is undoubtedly the case, I ask, how would it be possible 
to experience “a night of 122 days,” if the earth be a globe 
careering round the sun, as they say it does ? 

It is with decided satisfaction that I read of a western 
route having been located, and a depot being established up 
the glacier, 2,000 feet above sea level ; but it appears to me 
a little premature for the Royal Society Executive to deter¬ 
mine that the form of the presentation to Capt. Scott shall 
be a silver globe, with the route marked to scale, seeing that 
the Discovery expedition has in no way strengthened the 
hypothesis that we are living on a globe. If a globe is a 
suitable present on which to mark the route of the ship, why 
was the ship, in the first instance, not navigated by the aid 
of a globular chart ? We do not think that the gallant 
captain would have ventured out to sea with a globular 
chart ; had he attempted to do so, I feel assured that the 
voyage would never have been as successful as it has. 

I would suggest, therefore, as a more suitable form of 


present, a large silver block in the form of the great “ level 
plateau,” which he discovered, “ stretching interminably to 
the smith.” 




Lady Blount and Party. 

Lady Blount—Ed. of 7 he Earth ,— assisted by Messrs. 
Shackleton, Watts, Clifton, and others, met at the Old 
Bedford Sluice Bridge, about two miles from Downham 
in Norfolk, on Tuesday, May 10th, 1904, in order to 

make experiments upon the Old Bedford Canal. This canal 
is more than twenty miles in length, and, with the exception 
of a very small part, passes through that part of the Fens 
called the Bedford Level. From the furthermost end to the 
Old Bedford Bridge, at Salter’s Lode, there is no interruption 
from locks or water-gates of any kind. 

Standing on the bridge,and looking towardsWelncyBridge, 
a distance of 6 miles, those of the party who had not been to 
the place before at once corroborated the statement that “ it is 
the straightest canal in the kingdom.” The water is nearly 
stationary, and well adapted for ascertaining whether any 
convexity really exists—and, if so, to what amount,—for 
according to the accepted theory of the earth being a globe, 
25,000 English statute miles in circumference, the surface 
of all standing water must have a certain degree of convex¬ 
ity— i.e., ever)' part must be an arc of a circle. In brief, 
there will be a curvature of 8 inches in the first statute mile 
—and (according to the rules of geometry and geodesy) 
the curvature will be 32 inches in the second mile, the cur¬ 
vature increasing as the square of the distance multiplied 
by 8 inches ; thus the curvature in six miles would be arrived 
at by multiplying 6 by 6, and again by 8 :—6x6x8 = 288 
inches, and 288 inches equal 24 feet; hence a flag-staff, 
with the top part exhibiting a white square, was hoisted at 
Old Bedford Bridge, showing the assumed curvature of 24 
feet, that being the necessary elevation to get over the curva¬ 
ture represented in the distance between Old Bedford 
Bridge and Welney Bridge. 



At the edge of the water, in the same canal six flags 
in the shape of discs distinctively marked, were placed one 
mile from each other, the top of each being five feet above 
the surface, the last flag being near Welney Bridge. A good 
telescope was brought to the lowest point nearest the water’s 
edge at Old Bedford Bridge, and levelled to the altitude of 
the flags. Upon looking through the telescope the outlines 
on the flags were plainly seen, and each intervening flag 
had the same altitude; and this would have been an utter 
impossibility were it a fact that the earth is a globe, for the 
flag nearest to Welney Bridge, instead of being 19 feet below 
the line of sight was of the same altitude to the observer as 
the other flags ; in other words, the surface of the water was 
for six miles absolutely horizontal. 

A further proof was afforded by Mr. Shackleton—who 
superintended the proceedings for Lady Blount—entering 
a flat-bottomed boat, as near to the water’s edge as possible, 
and at 8.30 o’clock at night he generated acetelyne gas by 
means of aceteloid. The lamp used permitted of a naked 
light being seen. This lamp he held close to the water 
when standing in the boat. When he lit the lamp, at Wel¬ 
ney Bridge, at the time specified, Lady Blount, with others 
of the party, from a platform under Old Bedford Bridge, 
with their eyes less than 1 8 inches from the water, distinctly 
saw, not only the light but its reflection in the water beneath 
it starting from Welney Bridge, six miles off, which would 
have been impossible according to the globular hypothesis. 
The light flashed out straight to the eye of the observer- 
no hill of water intervening the whole of the distance. 

The New Photography-. 

Lady Blount and party proceeded on Wednesday after¬ 
noon, May 11 th, to Welney Bridge, for the express purpose 
of putting into practice the new photography. The name 
of Dallmeyer stands in the foremost rank in respect to 
long distance photograph)-, and the firm (with which is as¬ 
sociated the Earl of Crawford) permitted Mr. Clifton, an 
expert photographer acting for them, to bring down from 
their London establishment an instrument embodying the 
latest development of telescopic photography. Before leav¬ 
ing Old Bedford Bridge, a white sheet with a black centre 
was spanned across the canal down to the water’s edge. A 
platform of planks, flush with the water and abutting upon 


39 f 

Welney Bridge, was erected, and formed the position of oper¬ 
ation for the photographic arrangements, and here the centre 
of the camera was exactly two feet above the water, and focus¬ 
sing the white screen near Old Bedford Bridge. The import¬ 
ant question : “ Can a photo be taken six miles distant under 
such circumstances ?” could not be decided on theWednesday, 
but after Lady Blount stepped on to the platform, at the 
Institute Hall, Shanklin, Isle of Wight, (where her ladyship 
was about to deliver a lecture,) on Thursday evening, a 
telegram was handed to her from the photographer, to the 
effect that the screen was visible in the photo—an undoubted 
proof that no curvature could have intervened along the six 
miles from Welney Bridge to Old Bedford Bridge. 

The railway bridge, 3 miles beyond Welney Bridge, was 
observable even with the naked eye, and looking from Old 
Bedford Bridge, through the arch of Welney Bridge, trains 
could be clearly seen crossing the water. Therefore we ask : 

Even before the operations could be commenced, owing to 
dull weather, telegrams reached Lad)- Blount from notable 
people eager to learn the results. 



The Ed. of The Earth proves the unglobularity of the earth's 
surface, by the aid of the latest discoveries and improvements 
in the Art of Photograph)-. 


Proctor's admission that “ if with the eye a few inches 
front the surface of the Bedford Canal , an object close to the 
surface , six miles distant front an observer , can be seen , there 
mani/estlv would be 


is to-day practically proved to be a fact. Xo “ ifs ” are left 
in the case. “ Parallax ” is corroborated ; and the position 
of John Hampden, Esq., is vindicated and proved to be true, 
and the decision in his case was unjust. 

Mr. Clifford (acting on behalf of J. H. Dallmeyer, Ltd., of 
25,Newman St.,London, for Lady Blount,) placed a specially 

39 2 


prepared and extended camera, with an extraordinary tele¬ 
scopic lens, on a platform, which was fixed under Welney 
Bridge, close upon the water, and lying quite flat upon that 
platform, face downwards, he focussed a square screen which 
was fixed with lower edge close to the water under the Old 
Bedford Bridge, six miles distant. The result being that 
not only is the screen visible in the photograph, but also its 
shadow, reflected in the water below. 

A number of copies of this photograph, taken (as described 
above) on May nth, 1904, at about 2 p.m., will be issued. 
Those who desire to possess a copy are requested to send 
whatever they can individually afford to pay for one, to help 
defray the heavy expenses incurred by the Ed. But the 
Lord will provide. A few copies will he presented gratis to 
those who cannot afford to pay for one. No one can have 
two copies. 

* “ Mvtlis and Marvels of Astronomy.’ - 

By E. II. RICHES, LL.D., E.R.A.S., 

Member of the “ London Mathematical Society 
late Cantab , etc. 

(1 continued from p. 367.) 

This star, however, has been seen as far south as the tropic 
of Capricorn. I am given to understand that, in the “ Naval 
and Military Intelligence” of the Times , of 13th May, 1S62, 
it is distinctly stated that Captain Wilkins distinctly saw the 
Southern Cross and the Polar Star at midnight, in 23 0 S 3 
lat., and 35° 46" long. It would seem therefore, that this 
fact, with reference to the Polar Star being visible below the 
equator at such a distance, might form a strong argument 
against the rotundity of the earth. 

Some time since, it was a common practice amongst sur¬ 
veyors, and men laying out canals and railways to allow S 
inches for every mile, for the consideration of the convexity 
of the surface of the earth. It was supposed that, if this 
were not done, the water in the canal would not remain 
stationary. It has, however, since been discovered that 
things are more satisfactory when the allowance of 8 inches 
to the mile is not permitted to enter into the calculations at 
all ; in fact in those cases where an allowance is made, every 
thing turns out most unsatisfactory. 




The allowing then for convexity, or what was called by 
engineers “ forward levelling,” has given way to the method 
of “ back-and-fore ” sight, or “double sight,” where no 
allowance whatever is made for convexity. Those who argue 
in favour of the earth’s surface being a plane, point proudly 
to the fact that all the most practical scientific men of the 
day totally disregard the sphericity of the earth’s surface, 
and regard it, for all practical purposes, as if it were a plane. 

What has been thus far said, with reference to the form 
of the earth, is intended to be of interest to the reader ; and 
it is not to be supposed that the theory of the earth being 
a fixed plane has been supported in opposition to the gen¬ 
erally received idea of the sphericity of the earth, and of its 
orbital and axial motion. Some of the leading arguments 
in favour of the Newtonian theory, have been briefly touched 
upon and in such a manner that the soundness of the same 
is brought in question ; still if the way in which I have 
treated the same be in accordance with the truth, it will not 
be necessary for any - one to be offended. 

The reader who is not versed in astronomy, and is un¬ 
acquainted with the methods adopted for the calculation of 
various astronomical phenomena, will readily- point to the 
splendid exactness with which astronomers foretell a coming 
eclipse, and hold that up to those who would advance the 
theory of the earth’s surface being a plane. It might at first 
seem fair and just for him to do so ; but when it is known 
that these astronomical calculations, exact as they are, are 
not dependent upon any theory whatever, and would hold 
even in the event of all known theories being disregarded, 
he will be led to see tjjat the theory of the earth’s surface 
being a plane, does not seriously affect astronomy in the 
main. Those acquainted with astronomy know full well that 
the necessary data for managing calculations are tabulated, 
and used without necessary reference to any theory. And 
again, at the will of the calculator, any theory might be 
adopted, and equally true results will follow. From years 
of practical observation, certain tables of the moon’s relative 
position have been made, and may, if it please the astrono¬ 
mer, be used in connection with any theory whatever. It 
is a known fact that Ptolemy, who lived in the second cen¬ 
tury of the Christian era, did not fail, notwithstanding the 
considered defects of his system—to calculate with exactness 


all the eclipses that happened during the period of the 
coming 600 years. 

In his lectures on Natural Philosophy, Professor Parting¬ 
ton observes :—“ The most ancient observations of which 
we are in possession, that are sufficiently accurate to be 
employed in astronomical calculations, are those made at 
Babylon, about 719 years before the Christian era, of three 
eclipses of the moon. Ptolemy who has transmitted them 
to us, employed them for determining the moon’s mean 
motion, and probably had none more old on which he could 
depend. The Chaldeans, however, must have made a long 
series of observations before they could discover their 
‘ saros,’ or lunar period of 6,585 days, or about 18 years; 
at which time as they had learnt, the place of the moon, 
her node and apogee, return nearly to the same situation with 
respect to the earth and the sun, and, of course, a series of 
nearly similar eclipses occur.” 

In Somerville’s Physical Sciences, it is said : “ No particu¬ 
lar theory is required to calculate eclipses ; and the calcula¬ 
tions may be made with equal accuracy independent oj any 
theory!' And, again, Sir Richard Phillips, in his Million 
of Facts, says: “The precision of astronomy arises, not 
from theories, but from prolonged observations, and the 
regularity of the motions, or the ascertained uniformity of 
their irregularities. Ephemerides of the planets’ places, of 
eclipses, &c,, have been published for nearly 300 years, and 
were nearly as precise as at present.” 

According, therefore, to my intention, as stated at the 
commencement of this pamphlet, we will suppose the earth 
to be a plane, and free from any orbital or axial motion. 
The earth then being fixed, we must suppose the sun to 
move and we shall be led to see that with these suppositions, 
—namely, the surface of the earth being a plane, and fixed, 
and the sky to move in such a manner as will be described, 
the change of seasons, sun-rise and sunset, the position of 
some countries, necessitating a higher temperature than that 
of others, can all be accounted for, and perfect harmony may 
exist between our suppositions, and those facts with which 
we arc acquainted. 

(to he continued.) 



All communications and enquiries respecting this Magazine and the teaching it 
upholds, and all questions and matter for insertion, should be addressed to 
E.A.M.B., n, Gloucester Road, Kingston Hill. 


The Ed. does not necessarily endorse statements made under the headings of “ The 
Earth's Observatory,' 5 Letters, etc., unless signed Ed. The Earth. 

{C Sees! thou a man diligent in his business? he shall stand before kings.” 

The Holy Scriptures are the essence of verity, and it is impossible for any 
statement made Lherein to fail in its general meaning. I am led to quote the 
above verse from Piov. xxii. 29, by the success of Mr. Maurice Graham (con¬ 
nected with the company of Graham, Morton, & Co., Ltd.) ; this gentleman 
having been congratulated by Royalty. “Wake up,” were the stirring words 
spoken by II R.H. the Prince of Wales, and it is evident that the) 1, fell deeply 
into the hearts of Maurice Graham, Esq., and Joseph Morton, Esq., the cele¬ 
brated engineers of Hunslet, Leeds. And this admonitory plnase inspired these 
gentlemen to a determination to awake to action, and press forward beyond lines 
which had hitherto been the limit to English and American achievements in the 
rapidity of construction and equipment of unique engineering works of the most 
advanced and permanent description. The fact that H.R.H. the Prince of 
Wales personally congratulated these gentlemen on their great ability,, should 
convince every person—in this country at least—that they deserve high com¬ 
mendation, aid that “ Mr. Maurice Graham is the presiding genius” is universally 

I am proud to slate that Mr. Maurice Graham takes an interest in The Earth. 


[Received from a Lady in the Isle of Wight.] 

“ He made the round earth [world] so fast that it cannot he moved, still * those 
things which cannot he shaken shall remain.’— Heb. xii. 27 : Feter iii. 7, 10, 12, 
13. Also.: ‘ When the earth shall he removed like a cottage,’ and which has 
been shaken already considerably out of its orbit, as modern writers assert, and 
really the geographical chapter re tempests, and cyclones, and floods, and earth¬ 
quakes, in the 7th vial of Dr. Cummings, also accidents, endorses much for the 
last few years—earth tremours, and quakes winch have been most remarkable, 
and instructive and seem to have signifieance however round or flat , still this is 
the same —certainly the part of the world you quoted about is a remarkable specimen 
to corroborate your theory, still there are great levels and plains in many parts of 
the world. In seeking the d£ep things of God and his deep counsels, scripture 
must he at unity , or a failure otherwise, and though the unbeliever cavils re 
‘ verses ’ which do seem to roiHradict themselves without references and right 
translations especially, still there is notone re the dissolving of this zvorld —and 
‘what manner of persons we ought to he,’ and the signs and tokens of an ‘ evil 
time,’ which don’t seem a convenient topic to those so attached to their riches 
and the good things of this life moreover lies, injustice, and oppression, and false¬ 
ness increase, and reign incarnate with some, I am grieved to know, and realize 
as only stubbornness and hardness of heart.—As to the astronomical question, 
I should feel only too inter-sted to meet you again. Re this matler Sir I.Newton 
quotes, ‘ that on a spedfied number of years, a comet shall so damage the sun 
that it will cease to give light and heat to ihe earih,’ if so it only corresponds 
with the plague of dense darkness as within.” 

The quotation you give about “the round earth” is from the Prayer Book. 
It is not in the revised version of the Bible nor even in the authorized version. 
It is not in the original. But even if it were, a thing may he round and flat like 
a penny. 

The word earth in the Holy Scriptures refers always to the land portion of the 
world as distinct from the waters of Ihe sea. 


39 ^ 

All water is level, and the different portions of land are therefore flat. The 
earth or land may be shaken by an earthquake but that does not show it is 
moving regularly and continually in an orbit. 

The 7th"vial is still future. When it comes the world—I believe—will pass 
through an awful crisis. The texts I quoted from the Bible about the shape ot 
the earth are clear, and every Christian ought to believe them. And there are 
none in support of the globular theory. Not one when rightly understood. The 
Bible harmonizes itself. It is the false exposition of difficult parts that make it 
appear to contradict itself. But God is one, and so is truth, though there may 
be different branches of it. You refer to Sir Isaac Newton’s prophecy about a 
comet. But that prediction has not been verified. The comet may have come at 
the time specified, but if it did it failed to damage the sun, in fact some astron¬ 
omer’s teach that the sun’s light is fed by comets. But both theories are absurd. 

But as you remark many are too engrossed with the riches of this world to study 
these things, and so they are left in their delusions. 

Therefore let us follow God’s truth wherever it leads us, and at all costs. 

O. —You say we should fall oft' the earth if it were a whirling globe. \ on 
therefore believe in ex centrifugal force, but not in counteracting force of gravi¬ 
tation. Why, then, does a ball thrown up, or shot from a cannon, descend to 
the earth again ? Whv does’nt it fly oft' the earth ? 

A.—Zetetics neither believe in centrifugal force nor in gravitation. They are 
simply the inventions of those who promulgated the globular theory. Zetetics 
don’t need them. But we know, by practical experiments, that heavy bodies fall 
when their supports are taken away ; if therefore the earth were a rotating globe 
we should all fall off as soon as the earth turned us topsy turvv. 

Q.—-Can you give date and particulars of Sir Ilenry Holland’s statement, 
that the sun and moon were both above the horizon during a lunar eclipse. 

A.—Sir Henry Holland stated in his “ Recollections of his Past Life,” quoted 
in the “Story of the Solar System,” that the sun and moon had been both seen 
above the hori^bn at the same time, when the moon was eclipsed, on the 2<>th 
April, 1837 ; therefore hU book must have been written since then. Of course 
the moon has risen eclipsed before the sun had set somewhat recently-—within 
the past two years. I remember the occurrence quite clearly. 

<).—Can you explain what becomes of sun, moon, and stars? They rise in 
ihe^east. disappear in the West, re-appear in the Last. Where do they go? 

A.—These bodies revolve over and around the plane earth ; when they get 
too far from ns, they disappear and go over other pails of the world. Thev are 
not able to shine over all the world at one lime, no more than we can see all 
over the heavens at one time. 

Miss L. HODGES. 

Q.—You sav that fresh water (canals, «&c.) is level, hut this does not prove 
thal the sea is also level. How do vou explain the fact of the tides, which 
are very evident ? Do you believe that tlie moon affects the tides ? 

A.—We sav that the surface of water is level, both sea water and fresh water. 
Of course its horizontal surface may he disturbed at times by storms, or tides. 
Tides are caused by the alteration in the respective levels between the earth and 
sea. We mav know that the surface of the sea cannot rise above its level, fin- 
water will rise up to its level, but not above it. And as the earth (or land) 
rises upon the waters of the great deep, like everything else which rests upon 
the water, it has a sort of undulatory motion, rising and lolling at slow intervals. 
The motion evidently regulates these intervals, hut the motion is not the cause 
of lhe tides. 

(), — 1 low is it we get night and day? The sun always rises in the east and 
sets in the west. How does it return to the east every morning if the earth is 
not a globe ? 

A.—The sun returns to the east even* morning because it goes all round, and 

Jhove the plane earth. I have answered this question scores of times. (Sec 
htrther in answer to third question). ♦ 

q).—Where are the moon and stars by day ? 

A.—This seems an absurd question. Sometimes the moon is overhead, and 
can he seen in the daytime. And some of the stars are always overhead, hut 
their light cannot he seen as it is swallowed by the greater light of the sun. 
Enquirers should watch for themselves. Stars can he seen in the daytime from 
the deep and dark shaft of a coal mine, or with suitable telescopic arrangements. 


Shanklin, I.W. May 13th, 1904. - 

Dear Lady Blount,—Doubtless you will lie surprised to hear from a stranger. 
Your lecture last night afforded me intense pleasure, and deep interest to listen 
to, though 1 have heard of the theory you so skilfully manipulated re the earth. 
However, more anon re this interesting subject; and the queries I should like 
to ask are enclosed. I Consider it was a kind providence which led me to 
attend your lecture.—Yours faithfully, C. E. D C. 

Dear Lady Bloun*,—Will you kindly give me, in your next issue, the rate of 
the earth’s curvature at a distance of 100 miles ? I think you could make some 
telling expi riments in the Lake discrict. I congratulate you upon your photo¬ 
graph of the Old Bedford Canal, which you have sent to our mutual friend. 

It is verv convincing Can vou come and speak for us on the 22nd ? 


The amount of ihe earth’s curvature in 100 statute miles, according to the " 
teaching of modern “ science,” would he about 1 mile and 400 yards. 1 regret 
thal I was hooked to give a lecture in Croydon, on the date named, before I 
had the pleasure of receiving your kind letter. Your suggestion re Lake district 
I value, and will endeavour to carry it out when possible.—Ed. 

EX TRACI'S FROM LETTERS to the Editor of The County Press , I. ofW. 

41 Lady Blount’s lecture at Shanklin on the Earth subject, which has found u 
place in vour columns, was worthy of an audience filling the Institute Hall, and 
big crowds do not usually uphold the teachings of the minority. 

Mr. Editor, it gave me more than momentary satisfaction to hear you admit 
that Lady Blount’s lecture was learned, and I, as one who did mv best to puzzle 
her Ladyship, from n Globularist standpoint, must say it..would be difficult to 
find a more logical rensoner than Ls;rlv Blount, whose ably edited magazine, 
The Earth , wifi compare favourably with the best publications devoted to the 
exact sciences, 

I am an inquirer into plane-earth teachings si.,ce readings The Earth , and 
learning her Ladyship’s most convincing proofs that the Earth cannot be a globe 
careering through space at the rate of 19 miles a second. I am more than ever 
assured that Lwly Blount, is one of the leading lights of the 20th century, and 
the pioneer in pointing the way to the truth.” 

“I think Lady Blount is to he congratulated on the result of her visit to 
Shanklin. Besides the attraction of her musical conposilions there was a cun- 
sideTilde attendance to hear her address, and this was continued with much 
readiness and fluency for a good hour, the speaker’s voice retaining its clearness 
to the last word. It is no slight tiling to stand and face an audience, largely 
out of sympathy with one, and to continue one’s arguments, while smiles of 
dissent are plainly visible. Yet her hearers showed every courtesy and refrained 
from audible disapproval, patiently following statements which in many instances 
were not worthy of credence. Certainly "a clerical gentleman soon turned his 
hack upon the Priestess of the Flat Earth dogma, and marched out the whole 
length of the room, but the speaker was not often disturbed. [This gentleman had 
previously been anxiou dv inquiring the time of the last train, we are told.—Eh.]” 
THE EARTH A GLOBE.—Lrjcturr by Mr. R. STROUD. 

“On Monday evening Mr. R. Stroud, of Shanklin, gave an interesting lecture 
at the Palmerston Halt, as an answer to Lady Blount’s theories at the Institute ; 
it was before a small hut appreciative audience. He'contended thal it was a 
well-verified, immutable truth, and not an hypothesis, that the earth was a globe 
and not a plane. 

[If space allows, in my next issue I hope to print some quotations from the above 
with a few remarks thereon.—Ed. 1 






IVe have much pleasure in recommending the above work. 

The booklet contains the three thousand words, and idioms, 
which are most used in ordinary conversation ; sufficient to 
enable you to talk French all your life ; no fossil philological 
peculiarities, but French as it is actually spoken in France. 
Grammar underlies each group of examples, and we think 
this a cleverly condensed method of teaching the French 


The Author of French in Three Months also gives Lessons 
in Conversational French to adults, at 




Friends of the Ed. of this Magazine can testify to his ability 
and agreeable way of teaching. 

The Magnetic Nerve Invigorator Co., 


22, Budge Row, Cannon Street, 


Price of Appliances £1 Is., £2 2s., & £3 3s. 

Instalments may be arranged. 


VOL. V. <&efr 190 U No. 51. 


Under the above heading an article appeared in The 
Messenger for May, 1904. The Messenger is a monthly 
paper which professes to teach advanced religious truth. 
It also advertises, on its covers, criticisms of popular and 
Sectarian doctrines; also a reply to the higher critics, and 
“Joshua’s address to the sun and moon. 1 ' 

It might be expected that a paper of such pretentions 
would adhere to strict Bible teaching at all hazards, as against 
so-called scientific theories respecting the universe of God’s 
Creation. But the article under consideration betrays more 
concern to reconcile Bible statements with the perverted 
“ science ’’ of the day, especially of course the so-called 
“ science of astronomy, than to find out what is the truth of 
God on such matters. Hence the editor is more ready to 
quote from men who uphold modern theories of astronomy, 
than from Christian Zetetic writers who can give the only 
explanation of the miracle which is at all consistent with 
Bible teaching. But the editor of The. Messenger seems to 
ignore these, and tries with others to make the divine records 
bend into something like harmony with the science of the 
day. This seems highly inconsistent of one who professes 
a superior standard of Bible exposition. 

The editor of The Messenger quotes from The Glasgow 
Herald , which was reviewing an article on the subject in the 
Church Quarterly. From his article I will give the following 
extracts : 

“ One of the most frequently discussed of these difficulties has been, 
to all appearence, solved with admirable scholarship, and in the most 
conclusive manner, by a writer in the current number of the Church 
Quarterly. Probably no miraculous intervention of providence has 
presented a more formidable problem to human reason than that at 
Giheon, when the sun stood still in the midst of the heavens in order • 
Umt Joshua and his people might avenge themselves on their enemies. 
That the sun was actually and literally arrested in his mid day course 



is verified by the writer of the book of Ecclesiastics, the Rabbins, and 
the Greek and Latin Fathers. 

“ When the stupendous import of the miracle was understood by 
divines acquainted with the mechanism of the solar system (?) this 
literal interpietation was regarded as untenable, and while the German 
theologians, in explaining the occurence as an impression produced on 
the mind of Joshua, the sun seeming to stand still because the day’s 
work had been achieved between noon and sunset, our English exege- 
tists conjecture that the refracted light of the sun was sustained in the 
heavens after the disc had gone down.” 

This extract shows how the miracle was literally accepted 
by ancient worthies, who had no need to “ reconcile 5> it with 
modern atheistic theories of the universe ; and that it was 
onty when modern “ divines” accepted astronomical theories 
about “ the mechanism of the universe ” that they felt 
constrained to find some other “ explanation ” in harmony 
therewith. It is a curious fact that all such “ divines,” 
including the editors of professedly religious papers, seek 
for an explanation in harmony with what they believe to be 
the facts of “science,” rather than one in harmony with the 
inspired account and the general teaching of the Holy 
Scriptures on Creative truth. Really they, for the most 
part, throw discredit on the Bible account, as we have seen, 
by assuming it was “an impression” merely on Joshua’s 
mind (what about the Amorites—had they the same im¬ 
pression ?), or, that the phenomenon was caused by “ re¬ 
fraction,” or that the account is a myth, or a mere poetic 
license due to the exuberance of the Eastern imagination ! 

But let us notice what is this last, though probably not 
final, speculation as to what the miracle really is supposed 
to be, if miracle at all. 

The plain and unvarnished account of the Bible is to be 
discredited, and so the writer asks : “Why should the moon 
pause in the valley of Aijalon when at mid-day her light 
would have added no increasement to that of the sun ? ” 

Now the fact that the moon’s motion was also arrested, 
instead of being a difficulty with Bible student’s ought 
rather to show them that Joshua spoke by the inspiration of 
God. Had he only’ spoken as a man the sun’s light was all 
that he needed to enable him as an Israelitish general to 
pursue, and complete the conquest of, his enemies. Then 
why did he command the moon also to stand still ? Because 
if the moon had not been stayed, as well as the sun, the 
Israelitish calendar would have been put out of order; the 


2 7 

months would have been disarranged, and the reckoning of 
time and the cycles of time would have been interfered with. 
Hence we may see that Joshua spoke under the direct in¬ 
spiration of God, and that the sun did stand still, otherwise 
the moon need not have been interfered with at all. 

But what is this supposed 


I will again quote from the article in The Messenger. 

“To the writer in the Church Quarterly the miracle appears to have . 
been one of 1 protracted darkness rather than of protracted light.’ The 
sun and moon did indeed * stand suit ’ ” (though they are trying ail the 
time to prove they did not !) “ But the English words fail to convey 

tlie significance of the expression in the text.” (Oh !) “ In the 

language of the ancient poem, the Book of Jasher, Joshua addressed 
the sun, and said : ‘ Be thou silent ! Be dumb !’ And the sun stood 
still; silent; and the moon stayed ; that is stopped or ceased shining.’ 1 
(Italics mine). 

So that according to this the sun did not “ stand still ” at 
all, neither was the moon actually stayed over any valley ; 
they both simply “ stopped shining,” and went their ways ! 
So that Joshua was wrong, the ancient Israelitish worthies 
were all deceived, and eminent men of God since those 
days, until in modern times some “ German theologians ” 
arose who. were acquainted with the mechanism of the solar 
system ” ! 

Well may the Bible cry out: “ Save me from my friends ” ! 
if this is the way they handle the Holy Writings. 

We might certainly have expected something better than 
this from a prominent Christian editor. He quotes from 
Rig Vida , to show how a solar myth sprang up, but in his 
testimony fails! because he does not quote from the Word 
of God. He goes into Sanscrit, and says that the root ark 
means “to make bright, to cheer, to gladden, etc. From 
this root “ one of the names of the sun, Arkab," was derived 
meaning “a hymn, a song of praise, etc. Hence the myth 
that hymns of praise proceeded from the sun. There¬ 
fore, Joshua’s command amounted to no more than this, the 
sun must stop singing, that is, it must put out, or hide its 
light; it must “ cease shining.” That was all, and so ast¬ 
ronomy, or rather the Bible is saved from the reproach of 

2 S 


science ! The darkness was “ protracted rather than the 
light ” ! Although it was light to begin with, the “ darkness 
was protracted 11 ! And this protracted darkness enabled 
Joshua to pursue his enemies ! 

Well, those who can accept this explanation are easily led, 
but it seems apparent that it requires more credulity, or 
scientific gullibility, shall I say, than the ordinary Bible 
account demands of simple faith in Him who is able to do 
things past our human comprehension—even the Creator 
of heaven and earth. 


The great point insisted upon by these would-be ex¬ 
pounders, is, that the original Hebrew for “stand still” 
means also “ be thou silent.” But this is no new discovery. 
The translators of the Old Testament must have understood 
the Hebrew language. And in both the “Authorized Ver¬ 
sion,” and in the Revised Version, the old words are written : 
“Stand thou still while in the Revised Version the words: 
“ be silent ” are placed in the margin. There is no objection 
to either reading if properly understood. It is a wellknown 
fact that all motion produces sound, and as the sun is in 
rapid motion, there must be some sound attending on 
that motion. So that here again we have another proof of % 
the scientific accuracy of the Bible. 

The Bible clearly teaches that the sun’s motion is accom¬ 
panied by a sound; therefore if this sound must cease, the 
motion also, which causes it, must cease. Hence the record 
of this miracle is quite in keeping with Bible teaching, and 
true science. 

To command the sun to “ be silent ” is equivalent to the 
command “stand thou stillas there was no other way of 
stopping the sound but by arresting the motion. This at 
once harmonizes the difficulties. If we believe as the Bible 
teaches, and observation proves, that the sun is in motion- 
over a motionless earth, all is clear; but if we have more 
faith in so-called “ science ” than in the Bible, we shall have 
to accept all sorts of tricks of interpretation, resorted to in 
order to get rid of the difficulty of reconciling the statements 
of the Bible with modern ideas of the mechanism of the uni¬ 
verse. Besides, those who try to explain away this miracle 



because of the idea involved of a moving- sun, to be con¬ 
sistent, ought also to explain away every other passage in 
the Bible (and they are many) which speaks of the motion 
of the sun. 

Of course those who object to the account because of the 
miraculous are practically unbelievers in Bible inspiration. 
But professed Christians, and editors who pose as teachers 
of a high Christianit}', ought, in "ail consistency, to accept 
the Bible and the Word of God before the fanciful specula¬ 
tions of modern theoretical science. 

The book of Nature, also, itself reveals the true order of 
Creation to those who have eyes to read it aright. Only 
lately, in a daily paper, was another decisive proof of our 
contention. But this I hope to give in another article, under 
the title of The Land Proof. 


Another paper which professes to speak in a religious 
, manner, gives an article with the heading of the Planet Earth. 
The writer, under “ Medical Talk,” says, “that the earth, in 
common with all the planets, revolves around the sun is a 
fact which rests upon the clearest demonstrations of philoso¬ 
phy. That it revolves like them upon its own axis, is a truth 
which every rising and setting sun illustrates.” “ Either 
the earth moves around its axis every clay, or the whole 
universe moves around it in the same time.” 

This is the style of their reasoning. The “ fact” of the 
earth's revolution rests, we are told, upon philosophy ! 
We were taught to believe that “ facts are stubborn things,” 
but this gentleman has evidently found one of another kind. 

It “rests upon philosophy.” This is a poor basis for a fact 
to rest upon ; and strange to say this fact does not seem to 
rest long at a time. We are continually shaking it off its 
philosophic pedestal. Yet the writer adds, “ it pleased the 
all wise Creator to assign the earth its position amongst the 
heavenly bodies.” Oh ! we should like to know where he 
learned this. Has the Creator given him a special revela¬ 
tion ? We cannot find it in the Book which He has given 
us containing the revelation of His Will and His Works. 
We freely admit that the earth either moves round its axis 
of rotation “or” the whole of the heavenly bodies move 



around the earth. But which is it? Our opponents affirm 
that it is earth which rotates ; hence they are so anxious to 
explain away Joshua’s miracle, from which it is evident that 
he thought it was the sun which moved ! If they could prove 
that the sun, moon, and stars, were gigantic bodies at im¬ 
mense distances, it would seem incongruous to suppose that 
they all revolve about the earth. As this writer says: “To 
suppose the latter case to be a fact would be to cast a reflec¬ 
tion on the wisdom of the Supreme Architect, whose laws 
are universally harmonious.’’ But if an architect built a 
house, and then made an “electric globe to light it a million 
times bigger than the house, would not this reflect upon his 
skill ? So their suppositions are unsound, and their philos¬ 
ophy is at fault. 

If we profess to believe the Bible we should stand by its 
teachings against all the “vain philosophy” in the world. 
Bible writers, and Bible readers, for over five thousand years 
believed that the earth was stationary, and that the sun 
moved around it, and so caused the alternation of night and 
day. This agrees with the evident meaning of the account 
of Joshua’s miracle. If any one could give good proof that 
the earth moves, and that the sun is relatively stationary to 
it, then it would be time enough to attempt to "reconcile" 
the account with the “facts” of astronomy. But no man 
in the world has ever been able to do this. 

That the account was believed by the world of old, as a 
miraculous intervention on the part of the Creator, Who 
surely has all power over His Own Works, is testified by 
Josephus, whose statements I hope to give in a future issue. 


All that is really known of the motions of the heavenly 
bodies (sun, moon, stars, planets, and comets,) is from ob¬ 
servation. No other source of information is open to man. 

Whatever calculations may be made, the)' are all based 
upon observed phenomena. 

Whatever laws are laid down they should be the result of 



Eclipses can be known and foretold only by carefully- 
observing and noting all their past occurrences. The tables 
for future eclipses of the sun and moon could never have been 
made by mere calculation apart from the tabulation of the 
motions of these bodies in past ages. 

Hence it is that buildings for the purpose of discovering 
these celestial motions are called “ Observatories/’and the 
science is called “ Astronomy,” which means the Star Laws, 
or the laws of the stars ; i.e ., the laws which govern the 
motions,of the heavenly 7 bodies. • 

Our English word “science” is the Latin word scientia, 
and means knowledge: and our English word “ knowledge ” 
is from the Greek word gnosis. 

We must distinguish, therefore, between science and hypo¬ 
thesis ; between facts and theories ; between what wc know 
and what vve think. If we do this there will be quite a num¬ 
ber of so-called sciences which are no sciences at all. Geo¬ 
logy is in no sense a science. Chemistry is. Astronomy is 
a mongrel science, being partly knowledge and partly hypo¬ 
thesis. Geometry is a science. What we know can never 
be altered. But hypotheses must be constantly changed in 
order to accommodate or modify them with newly acquired 

A fact is a thing done , and is unchangeable. 

We approach the subject of the star motions, therefore, 
apart from all hypotheses. So-called astronomy 7 , instead of 
consisting of the collection of observed facts, is a changing 
sycstem of theories invented in order to explain the observed 

When theories are put forward where only a few facts are 
known, they have to be altered as the knowledge is accumu¬ 
lated. And no true theory can be formed unless and until 
we have all the data before us. 

It is on these lines that the subject of astronomy is treated 
in the Encyclopedia Britannica. There we read : 

“ Whether the earth rotates within the star sphere, or 
the star sphere rotates round the earth, or both the earth 
and the star sphere rotate, it is known that relatively to 
the earth , the star sphere rotates from east to west in 
twenty 7 -four sidereal hours. This rotation whether apparent 
or real, takes place without any appreciable change in the 
relative position of the fixed stars.” 

3 2 


Here then we have a plain statement of facts. But here 
is the parting of the ways. Men agree to theorize as to 
these observed motions, and at the outset, before they ac¬ 
quire a single additional fact, they lay it down that these 
motions of the star sphere are only apparent, and not teal. 
But this is just the point which has to be proved. 

Instead of waiting to prove it, they beg the whole ques¬ 
tion ; and quietly assume a conclusion which is absolutely 
at variance with our senses, which alone are capable of judg¬ 
ing the matter at all. 

And astronomers reach this conclusion, in spite of the fact 
that they have to make, in the same article, the following 
confession of truth : 

“ Thus far there is nothing in the observed celestial 
motions which opposes itself to the belief that the earth 
is a FIXED CENTRE around which the celestial bodies 
are carried/’ 

We are content with this presentation of the subject. We 
accept it at its full value; and this value cannot be over¬ 

If we follow the authors of this statement, we should have 
to ignore all our senses; and abandon fact for theory, what 
is clearly apparent for what is clearly unreal (though it is 
called ‘‘real/'’) And we shall have to accept the theorv of a 
“fictitious sun ” as a substitute for the “ real sun.” 

Thus do astronomers juggle with words ; and draw ficti¬ 
tious diagrams in order to support their theories. 

No matter what new facts may be observed, they are use¬ 
less to them ; for they must be forced into harmony with 
their great hypothesis. The hypothesis must not be adapted 
to the newly discovered facts. 

Astronomers are therefore just in the condition of an ani¬ 
mal tethered for his food. No matter what good food may 
lie beyond the length of the tether, it is impossible for the 
animal to get at it. So these astronomers may go to their 
so-called “ south pole,” but they start, securely tethered by 
their dominating hypothesis, which will control the inter¬ 
pretation of whatever they may see. And if the newly 
discovered facts do not agiee with the theory, so much the 
worse for the facts, which will be severely suppressed or 

But to return to Celestial Motions. The laws which 

celestial motions. 


govern them all can be ascertained only from observation. 
Any subsequent calculations of the motions of the heavenly 
bodies must be based on the previously known observations. 

There can be no calculations independent of previous 

As to the moon : it is a matter of observation that she 
moves in the same direction as the sun, and that it takes 
her 2 "]\ days to make her circuit of the star sphere. She is 
observed to be in the same place among the fixed stars 
every 27^ days. Relatively to the sun, she is rather more 
than 2 days later. So that the lunar month is about 29^ days. 

The planets are observed to have their own independent 
paths among the fixed stars ; and they vary in their respective 
circuits. Observation shows that they appear to move in 
loops : i.e., their circuits are made round moving centres. The 
purpose of astronomy is not to explain these motions but to 
accept the observations which explain the motions to us. 

The Sun has his own observed motions relatively to the 
fixed stars and the earth. And in the absence of any proof 
to the contrary we must believe that these motions are his 
real motions. If any wish to persuade us that these motions 
are not real, but only “ apparent /’ the burden of proof lies 
with them, and they must give us indisputable evidence that 
our senses are not to be trusted. But this is exactly what 
is wanting. Instead of proofs we are asked to accept 
hypotheses. But this we decline to do. 

It is idle to demand a hypothesis from us. It is not for 
us to explain the phenomena, but to observe them, and re¬ 
cord them, and believe them. 

- When what we see agrees with the Word of God, there is 
still stronger ground why we should not be moved from 
our position. In Ps. xix. 4-6, He who made the sun has 
told us that : 

“For the sun He hath set a tent among them (i.e., the 

And he, as a bridegroom, is going forth from his chamber. 

He rejoiceth as a mighty one to run his course. 

brom [one] end of the heavens is his going forth, 

And his revolution unto the ends of it. 

And there is nothing hid from his heat.” 

The statement in the Encyclopaedia Britannica (Art. As¬ 
tronomy) accords exactly with this : 



“The observations of the sun’s motions and place among 
the fixed stars during so great a number of years, furnish 
complete evidence that the sun moves through a great 
circle, and its path is always the same, and among the 
same stars. 

“ In a period of about 365 days the sun traverses the 
whole of this path ; and this period fixes for us the length 
of the year.” 

From the most ancient times this path of the sun was 
called the “ ZODIAC.” This word is popularly supposed to 
refer to animals or living creatures, from the Greek word 
sao, to live. But this is quite a mistake. The Greek word 
Zodiac comes from a primitive root, through the Hebrew, 
Sodi, which in Sanscrit means a way or a step. As the word 
Zodiac means the way or path of the sun as it moves among 
the stars in the course of the year, the name was obviously 
derived from this observed fact. 

This path (or Zodiac) was divided into twelve parts. Why, 
we know not, unless it arose from the observation of twelve 
full moons in the successive parts of it in the course of the 
year. These twelve parts were called “mansions'’ or “houses” 
in which the sun was looked on as dwelling for one month 
in each. 

The antiquity of these observations is shown by the “ Fifth 
Creation Tablet,’’ now in the British Museum. It reads as 
follows—our own remarks being put with brackets : 

“ Anu [/.*., the Creator] made excellent the mansions 
of the great gods [twelve] in number [re., the twelve signs 
of the Zodiac , or mansions of the sun,] 

“ The stars he placed in them. The lumasi [i.e., the 
groups of stars or figures ] he fixed. 

“ He arranged the year according to the bounds [i.e., 
the twelve signs] which he defined. 

“ For each of the twelve months three rows of stars [i.e., 
constellations] he fixed. 

“ From the day when the year issues forth, unto the 
close, he marked the mansions [i.e., the Signs of the Zo¬ 
diac] of the wandering stars [or planets] to know their 
courses that they might not err or deflect at all.’* 

Thus the most ancient observations agree with the most 
modern ; and both certify to the truth of God's Word. 

CELESTIAL motions. 


The path of the sun through the Twelve Signs of the Zo¬ 
diac is called the Ecliptic , because it is the line in which 
eclipses* take place. 

But the sun does not come back to quite the exact point 
in the sign, at the same moment when he commenced the 
year. This difference goes on every year ; but it is so small 
that it takes about 71 or 72 years to make a difference of 
one three-hundred-and-sixtieth part of the whole Zodiac. 
In other words it would take no less than 25,579 years for 
the sun to complete this vast cycle. 

This path of the sun, i.e.,the Ecliptic , if it could be viewed 
from immediately beneath the “ Polar” Star, would be seen 
as a complete and perfect circle, in which the Sun would 
be exactly the same distance from the horizon during the 
whole 24 hours: so that there would be no rising or setting. 
When, however, the observer is removed from this central 
position, the path of the sun is seen to be necessarily oblique, 
and the sun will be seen to rise and set obliquely. 

When the observer is standing beneath the sun, instead 
of the “ Polar ” star, the sun would be seen to rise and set 
perpendicularly , and no longer obliquely; the obliquity de¬ 
pending on the position of the observer relative to the point 
of the sun’s polarity. At this point, and on this line there 
would be no shadow , no matter what latitude he might be in.f 
But this line, called the Equator appears to be constantly 
moving North or South, because there is another motion of 
the sun to be considered. Indeed, there are dour motions 
to the sun. Two relative to the Fixed Stars, and two relative 
of the Earth. There is 

I.—The motion relative to the Fixed Stars : 

(() The annual cycle. 

(2) The great cycle of 25,579 years. 

Ih—The motion relative to the Earth. 

(1) The daily circuit of the hours. 

(2) The annual movement North and South, 

caused by the daily motion being spiral. 

* Eclipse means a failure \ by one body being left or blotted out for n time 
through another body being interposed. 

tWhen we are in this position with God, we experience the truth of James 
i. 17 . With Him as our only object there is “ no parallax.” Bur it is 
thc\introduction of any other second object which causes parallax. If we keep 
polarity with Him then there is no parallax, and no shadow caused by His 


It is needful to add a few words with regard to the last 
of these four motions caused by the daily circuit being 
spiral. On or about June 21st the sun's daily path 
relative to the earth reaches its furthest point North ; and 
on about December 2ist it reaches its furthest point South. 

The line immediately beneath the sun when at its northern 
limit is called the “Tropic of Cancer/’ The word “tropic” 
is from the Greek iropos, a turning. On reaching that nor¬ 
thern point it turns back, until in about six months it reaches 
its most southern limit, and again turns North. The southern 
point is called “The Tropic (or turning) of Capricorn.” 
And the parts of the earth between the circles thus marked 
out are called “ The Tropics .” The northern limit is known 
as the “ Summer Solstice,” and the southern limit as “ The 
“ Winter Solstice.” The days are longer in the former, and 
shorter in the latter. Solstice is derived from Sol, the sun, 
,gnd sis to, to make to stand. When the sun is midway be¬ 
tween the two Solstices the days and nights are equal. This 
occurs about March 21st, when going North, and about Sept¬ 
ember 23rd, when declining South ; and the days and nights 
being then equal, those points are called the Equinoxes (from 
the Latin nox, night). 

Further observation reveals the fact that the sun's path, 
called the Ecliptic, is not at these points immediately con¬ 
centric with the Equator : that is to say, the Equator does 
not have the Ecliptic for its zenith; but the. two circles are 
what is called Eccentric. 



In this diagram A M G O represents the earth’s Equator , 
and A D G J represents the sun’s Ecliptic ; and the points 
A and G will be the Equinoctial points, while points M and J 
will be sun's furthest point North and South. The twelve 
parts into which both are divided, correspond with the 
twelve signs of the Zodiac, which are represented as follows : 
A B : Aries (Equinox) G H : Libra (Equinox) 

13 C : Taurus H I : Scorpio 

C D : Gemini I J : Sagittarius 

1) E : Cancer J K : Capricorn 

(M the sun’s furthest North) (J the sun’s furthest South) 
E F : Leo K L : Aquarius 

h G : Libra L A : Pisces. 

As to the origin and meaning of these signs we must refer 
our readers to Dr. Bullinger’s Witness of the Stars.* One 

*Eyre & Spoiliswoode, 33, Paternoster Row, London ; pri:e 7/6 illustrated. 



thing seems evident, that their origin was Patriarchal, and 
served for20ooyears to perpetuate the great primeval promise 
and prophecy of Gen. iii, 15 ; and to keep alive the hope of 
the Coming “ Seed of the Woman/' The first sign, “Virgo,” 
shows Christ as the Virgin-born ; while the last shows Him 
as the “ Lion of the tribe of Judah” leaping forth to crush 
the head of the Dragon beneath His feet. 

When the Scriptures of Truth were afterwards written, 
the need for the Heavenly witness would be no longer 
needed. Hence the Babylonian and Greek Mythology was 
not virtually some newly invented system of error, but rather 
the perversion and corruption of primitive truth, after its 
great lesson had been lost to the nations. 

I have drawn a rough diagram showing how the sun can 
be seen when in Cancer. It is not true to scale, but it will 
illustrate my meaning. When the sun is in Cancer, at A, 
it could be seen at midnight over the North Centre (N.C.) 
as far as B, 66]° north latitude ; that is 90° degrees away. 
It cannot be seen in London, nor far beyond the 66th parallel 
N, because the rays are refracted above the atmosphere ; so 
that all that is beyond is in darkness at night. But at the 
same time the sun can be seen atN.Z. (New Zealand) because 
New Zealand is less than 90° away. Twelve hours later, 
when the sun arrives at C, it is of course daytime in London, 
SiJj N, and then the sun is too far away to be seen in New 
Zea and, and they have darkness there. But the sun can 
still be seen at what is called the North “ Pole," because it 
is less than 90° degrees away, hence the sun can be seen 
over this area all the 24 hours, and vice versa in the extreme 
south during our winter. 

The distance the sun can be seen, I believe, is about 90°. 




The Feast of the Sun celebrated a thousand feet in the air. 

Camille Flammanon, the world-famed astronomer, invited his friends and 
fellow scientists to a late supper, and to spend the night on the top of theF.iffel 
Tower in Paris, to witness daylight, which was continually visible for 24 hours. 
This took place on the night of June 21-22, and the Parisians called it “ Cam¬ 
ille Flammarion’s Feast of the Sun.” 

As I have already stated, when speaking, this is no surprise to me. In a 
recent address I pointed out the fact that the Midnight Sun, while visible in 
the south is seen a part of each 24 hours by us. And in The Earth , December 
1803, p. 302, reference is made to the Observatory on Ben Nevis, and the 
possibility of seeing the Southern Midnight Sun from such an Observatory, or 
from a captive balloon at North Cape, is suggested by Mr. Middleton. 1 think 
of trying to make observations from a balloon erelong. I also hope to start a 
ship for making further explorations in southern regions as soon as possible, 


(A Strange “ Science” Initiation). 

I read of a very sad case, 

In a dark aboriginal race, 

Invaded by white men, 

Who went there to fight them. 

And “civilize” all in that place. 

The white men. of course proving masters, 

Some benefits brought, and disasters ! 

But one of the worst, 

I've heard it rehearsed. 

Was binding all down with stick-fasters. 

They fastened their feet to a flat form, 

Attached to a big wheel, as platform ; 

Then turning the big wheel , 

Though some natives did squeal, 

They swung them heads downward in that form ! 

Those Antips, nigh guilty of treason, 

Should all have repented their knees on ; 

For by whirling them round, 

Ere long it was found, 

That many poor souls lost their reason ! 

“ Zetetes .” 


I would not for all the world judge any man. I dare not do so, but false 
doctrines and false “ science ” I may condemn, and I adopt this course, 
not with the idea of condemning those who have been deceived by these 
things, but in hopes of opening the eyes of all who might be thus deceived. 
All error is outside the pale of Christianity. If a man or woman be enlightened 
in all true doctrine, possessing knowledge of truth even beyond his or her 
fellow creatures,and yet acts not up to that light or knowledge possessed,such will 
undoubtedly stand condemned more than one who, though less enlightened, 
lives up to the light he possesses. 

But the world has been educated in unscriptural cosmogony, and for about 
300 years all upholders of modern science, so far as the globular theory is con¬ 
cerned, at least, have led men to regard the Bible as being very fallible, while 
their Scripture-contradicting science is set forth as infallible and irreproachable 
truth. Therefore, the present generations are to be pitied rather than condemned, 
because through the force of use ’tis hard to leave the faith of kin or sire. Yet 
the truth will prevail and live 1 And may each one of us be led into her paths, 
is my earnest wish. 

“In your article on * degrees ’ on page 382 of The Earth, you state that a 
degree is the 360th part of the circumference of a circle. Then you go on to 
say that (he degree (°) is divided into 4 minutes of 60 seconds. 

“ Now this statement is very misleading, as the degree, as defined in the 
opening sentence, is divided into 60 minutes of 60 seconds, or 360 seconds; 
when spoken of as consisting of 4 minutes of 60 seconds, or 240 seconds, some 
explanation, I think, should be given as to how this is arrived at. This would 
prevent any confusion between angular measure (in which the degree is divided 
into 60 minutes) and time, where in 4 minutes the sun’s position in regard to the 
earth is changed one degree.” 

REPLY.—In the first place what was intended to be stated was that : accord¬ 
ing to the Eneyefopced'a Britannica (not necessarily my own opinion), a “degree” 
is the 360th p ;rt of the circumference of a circle, and the principle is applied 
to the circumference of the earth, which Newtonian astronomers assume to he 
a globe ; but the position of the sun in regard to the earth’s surface is, for pur¬ 
poses of calculation, supposed to change one degree (o) every 4 minutes—U» 
degrees each hour, making a total of 360 degrees in 24 hours. Navigators are 
taught to “ suppose ” that the sun changes its place, but we know that the sun 
does really change its place with respect to the earth ; travelling over and around 
it in 24 hours. The wording of the two paragraphs referred to, was intended to 
convey this idea, and when it was put that a degree is thus divided into 4 
minutes of 60 seconds, it was intended to inform my readers that, by this method 
of calculation, the time allowed for the sun to move one degree over the earth 
would be 4 minutes. It is, however, unnecessary again to traverse the ground 
of my previous article, though I had perhaps stated my opinion too briefly. But 
anyone can see that the 4 minutes must refer to the time it takes the sun to 
travel one degree over any particular country. This gives 15° per hour, and 
360° for a day. 


A Corre*[>ondent. who queries my figures admits the fall would be nhoiu 
4,000 utiles, front N to K, on a globe such as our earth and sea is said to he. 
He, however, goes 00 to endeavour to diilereiuiate the dip in the quarter-circle* 
lie say*: “ the dip of half of the globe would be 4 000 miles to centre of the 
ei'rlH, hut in the quarter-circle it would not be one third this.” But as a matter 
of fact, it is a conclusion based upon unquestionable ground that the curvature 
of# globe of 23,000 miles increases as the square of the distance multiplied by 
8 inches ; and if an object has been seen by long-sighted people with a telescope, 
after the asserted curvature of the globe’should have hidden such object, it ii 
proof positive that the earth is not it ghdie. 

There is an old adage : “you cannot eat your cake and have it too ; ” so i n 
like manner, you tannot have your..globg and see over the,curve at the same 
time. There are hundreds of instances on record, gathered from present-day 
experience, where lighthouses and other objects are continually seen, when, if 
the earth were a globe, they would be hidden bv the earth’s curvature. 

'' L 


Lines fropj Lady Blount's Manuscript 
Case. 1 
'■■■ ■ (Matt. v. 40.) 

"f. . * 

.: -. l x \ ; .. . ‘ t 

In blissful shades 
Fair, glorious ether morn, 

So beautiful, so lovely, and so bright. 
Thou waftest o’er 
Sweet fragrance and delight— 

With hope-dear hope— 1 ■ 

And peace, and joy conjoin’d. 

The fleecy clouds—■ 

Glide softly o’er the sky, 

A thousand, shapes pass onward swift 
Vet linger some, ; [and fast. 
As iHo’ enframed and cast 
By more than “chance,” 

And legion forms flit by. 



The gorgeous sun 
Sets forth to mark Time’s course, 

Full disc above horizon, bold & grand 
The sky king moves 
God’s medium pow’r—or Hand ! 
Through rays converged— 

Brings light from heaven to earth. 

God’s Will be done 
His sun declares Hi? glory. 

Each day his zenith’s reach’d—noon’s 
In cipher fine /[hour is told : 
His course we thus behold : 

Th’ heavenly bodies speak ! 

Faithful their witness—true ! 

Yet life’s fair morn 
In hope full often breaks, 

But without God it passes as the wind; 

Each mundane thing 
May perish—unfulfill’d ! 

But Wisdom lives ! 

And is fo,und through Christ in God. 


How much right has the state to teach a child what its parents do not believe, 
and make them pay for it ? No right at all say the Nonconformists......Most 

people say the parents have a right to have their children brought up in their 
own views ; but the same people, who give this as a conclusive solution of the 
problem, might be staggered if they were asked to apply that solution consist¬ 
ently. For instance, there are 10,000 people in Britain who firmly believe that 
the earth is a disk with the North Pole in the middle, and no South Pole at 
all; and that the sun is a small body, always over the earth-disc, whose rising 
and setting are a meie effect of perspective ; and that this is the teaching both 
of the Bible and of true science. The “ Zetetics,” as they call themselves, are 
numerous enough to support an ingenious magazine (The Earth) as big as the 
Race-Builder. They call for the banishment of the globe from the schools. 
This means practically the abolition of geography and astronomy as at present 
taught. Yet how can the Nonconformist who objects to rate-supported Anglican 
teaching, or the Anglican who objects to rate-supported “undenominational 
religion,” consistently refuse their support to the Zetetics.—CALDWELL 
HARPUR.s (From The Race-Builder.) 

Although some Zetetics may have been led in the past to think that there 
is no “ South Pole,” all leading Zetetics, now living, admit that there is a South 
Pole, or point in the heavens , but not such a Sou h “pole” as that which is 
taught as^ being the end of the supposed axis of the earth.—Ed. 



A Monthly Magazine of Sense & Science 

Upon A Scriptural Basis, 

And of Universal Interest to all Nations and 
Peoples under the sun. 

Edited by E. A. M. B. 





The Level Surface of Water and Land ? 


1. Bedford Level Experiments (illustrated)... I 

2. Dr., D.D., (Ed. of the “ Rainbow”) on Joshua x. 4 

3. Converging Meridians Down South, by E . E. Middleton . 8 

4. The Earth : Is it a Globe ? by The Ed. ... . 10 

5. Stretched Out Upon the Waters, by E. H. Riches . 13 

6. Bedford Level (reply to a globularist), by The Ed. . 16 

7. Earth’s Observatory, Letters, &c. l_ 21 

No. 49 & 50. Four Pence. 

Publisned by Lady Blount, 11, Gloucester Road, Kingston Mill. 



£ S. d. 

Two lines of not more than 20 words ... 10 

Kvorv additional line of H> words ... 4 

Every additional 10 words after the first 50 ft 

Ouarter of a page ... ... . . ... TO 

Half page ... . ^ 0 

Whole page .. ... ... ... 10 0' 

•• The Earth " is also published by Messrs. John 
JlEVWtxm, Manchester; Jonathan Nicholson, 22, Budge 
Bow, Cannon Street, London, IS.C. ; W. Parker, Bookseller 
and Publisher, jo, Monteilh Row, Glasgow, Scotland; and 
BROWN & Co., Publishers, 2 Q, Paternoster Square, London, 


All communications should be addressed to 
E.A.M.B., 11, Gloucester Road, Kingston 
Hill, England. 

Postal Orders should be made payable to 'E. . 1 . M. BLOl \"/ \ 
Post Office, Kingston Hill, Surrey, England. 

Treasurer Universal Zetetic Society: 

Early BLOUNT, i i Gloucester Road, Kingston Hill. 

t 'U.. V 

■£- §*(#*•/ 90 /f-Xos. 49 & 50. 


We give below two reproductions of the photograph taken 
nil ihr Bedford Level. 

I In- second photo is marked with dots, a cross, and the 
L-i ler A,to indicate to the reader the position of tine screen,etc. 

1 In’ two dots (:) are the screen and its reflection in the 
water below it near Bedford Bridge. 

frees near this Bridge form a background to the screen, 
nid its reflection rests upon their shadow on the water. The 
■■ "ill iiuiation of the canal beyond Bedford Bridge cannot be 
• it from the direction of Welnev Bridge, even quite near 
] 1, because there is a junction of canal paths here, and their 


Dalltneyer s latest pattern Photo-Telescopic Camera was 
used for the experiment. It was placed in position less than 
two feet above the ground-level by the expert operator from 
Dallmeyer's, and that gentleman, Mr. Clifton, being a globu- 
larist (see his letter, printed below) it cannot be suggested 
that he would lend himself to unprofessional practice, and 
were such conduct on his part possible he would have 
sophisticated the instrument, or the locus in quo, so as to 
favour plane-earth teaching; he, however, irrespective of re¬ 
sults, acted up to the letter of the test experiment. Mr. 
Clifton had to lie down,in order to manipulate the instrument, 
close under Welney Bridge, a distance of six miles from 
Bedford Bridge, the screen being fixed rather to the right of 
the bridge. The cross at the edge of the photograph repre¬ 
sents the position of the camera. 

The letter A is intended to draw your attention to a dark 
chimney, connected with some works near the canal. This 
chimney is just midway betwixt the two bridges, i.e., it is 


ilirec miles from Welney Bridge, and three miles from Bed- 

lord Bridge. 

This experiment was carried out in misty and very un¬ 
satisfactory weather, on May i ith, 1904, before Lady Blount 
and several scientific gentlemen, and proves conclusively that 
if the world be a globe having a circumference of 25,000 
miles, the bottom of the screen should have been certainly 
o\er 20 feet below the line of vision in the six miles view. 
As the whole of the screen, and its reflection in the water 
beneath were observed and photographed, no curvature can 
possibly exist; the theoretical scientists are wrong and 
beaten, and Parallax, John Hampden, Wm. Carpenter, and 
the army of Zetetics were, and are, right in their contention 
that the World is not a globe ! 

. ****** 

To Lady Blount. 

Dear Madam, 

Referring to the experiments at Salter’s Lode, 
Downham, Norfolk, May 1 ith, 1904 ,1 have much pleasure in 
testifying to the fairness of the conditions under which they 
were conducted. I arrived on the spot with the distinct idea 
that nothing would be seen of the sheet at a distance of six 
miles, but on arrival at Welney I was surprised to find that 
with a telescope, placed two feet above the level of the water, 

1 could watch the fixing of the lower edge of the sheet, and 
afterwards to focus it upon the ground glass of the camera 
placed in the same position. 

The atmospheric conditions were very unfavourable, a day 
of sunshine having succeeded several wet days and thereby 
caused an aqueous shimmering vapour to float unevenly 
on the surface of the canal and adjoining fields. This pre¬ 
vented the image from being as sharply defined as it would 
be under better conditions; but the sheet is very plainly 
visible nevertheless. This trouble is well known to all who 
have practised telephotography. 

With regard to the lens used, I may say that this had an 
equivalent focal length of between 16 and 17 feet, which 
ensured an image of appreciable size being obtained at such 
a distance. 

1 should not like to abandon'the globular theory off-hand, 
but, as far as this particular test is concerned, I am prepared 




to maintain that (unless rays of light will travel in a curved 
path) these six miles of water present a level surface. 

Yours faithfully, 

For f. H. DALLMEYER, Ltd ., E. CLIFTON. 

(Chairman: The Rt. Hon. the EARL CRAWFORD, K. T., F.R.S.,etc.,) 
25, Newman Street , London , W. 

The Scientific Department under the control of T. R. Dallmeyer , F.R.A.S ., etc. 


Managing Director; G. E. St. L. Carson , B.A. (Cantab), B.Sc. 

Thus,by the aid of the latest discoveries and improvements 
in the art of photography,the earth’s ?/«globularity is proved, 
and this fact coupled with Proctor’s admission that, “ if with 
the eye a few inches from the surface of the Bedford Canal , 
an object close to the water , six miles distant from the ob¬ 
server can be seen, there manifestly ivould be 

Something Wrong in the Accepted Theory,”** 

should awaken present-day scientists to the reality that there 
IS something wrong. 

* Myths and Marvels of Astronomy. 


Dr. Leask was once asked the following questions: “In 
the case of the miracle related in Joshua x., is it to be sup¬ 
posed that God wrought such a stupendous wonder as would 
be involved in the actual stoppage of the earth in its orbit, 
and consequent arrest, for the time, of the whole solar system, 
and possibly of other systems also? Or, is it to be supposed 
that by some supernatural appearance, the effect (i.e,, of 
continued daylight) desired by Joshua might have be pro¬ 
duced, and, if so, by what means could it have been produc¬ 
ed ? And in what way would you state your hypothesis so 
as to meet and answer the views of those sceptics who make 
this passage their great weapon of attack upon the word of 


I >1, I .cask’s reply was as follows : Is it to be supposed that 
i,,I slopped the earth in its orbit ? We can only answer that 
I * 11 ourselves, and that answer is No ; we never supposed 
,un thing so inconceivably marvellous, and so utterly at vari- 
,ini r with truth. The history does not say that Joshua 
u I Ill'll the earth to stand still, for it could never occur to him it moved, but the sun and moon ; and God in pity to his 
l„i.plc, and in accordance with the desire of his servant, so 
idol cd it that the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, 
mild the people, had avenged themselves upon their enemies.’ 

Ii moil will read the ‘earth’ or ‘the globe’ as they choose 

u, , ,dl it -a word unknown to the Bible—instead of the 1 sun ’ 

Iluw must do the best they can to get out of the difficulty ; 
uni if they find that impossible, which assuredly they will, 

1110 solution is obvious—reject the Bible for saying what it 
never said ! This is so easy, so logical and so worthy of 
Inmost and honourable men! It is true that in rejecting 

1 In- Bible for the story which they have palmed upon Joshua, 
i|,o\ may lose all Devine truth, and come short of the offered 
pi of eternal life in Christ; but what of that? Science, 

I ,mms science, must be upheld at any cost, although this 
,,.•, 1.lorfnl goddess is afflicted with a short memory, and 
. nii.1 diets herself with edifying frequency. 

I , iv to be supposed that by some supernatural appearance 
ilo effect was produced ? The " suppositions ” in this case 
o . mid form a rich chapter ill the curiosities of literature, and 

v. 1 mId be very entertaining, but for the sad fact that they 
Inme their authors to have been firm believers in a scientific 
1 henry, which they accepted on the word of men, and to 

II i 1 h the Word of God must at all hazards bow. As we are 
under no such necessity, we do not “suppose’ any mere 
■ ppearance, or occular illusion, but accept the grand FACT 
1I1.1I the sun stood still, and produced the desired result. 

Mow would we state our hypothesis so as to meet and 
miswer the views of sceptics? We should be very glad in- 
tI itiI to see sceptics brought to the belief of the truth, as 
iii.iiiv years of labour with the voice and the pen prove; but 
nr have no hypothesis to state on this subject. There is no 
need of any. The event is stated as plainly as any other 
in the history of the great Jewish general. Copernicus does 
nut trouble us when the Maker of the earth speaks about it. 



The magnificent fable of scientific astronomy does not shake • 
our faith in the testimony of the inspired writers respecting 
the world. The earth is an immense plane, at rest where 
God placed it, not a globe flying through space with light¬ 
ning speed. The sun is a light in the firmament, moving 
abov e the earth, in his ‘ circuit ’ daily, as the beneficent Cre¬ 
ator ordained ; and to stop him for a day in his progress, 
although the act of sublime omnipotence, like that of stopping 
the river for the ransomed to pass over, troubled no “globes”' 
and caused no derangement in “ solar systems. ’ The im¬ 
mobility of the earth is unquestionably taught in Scripture ; 
reason and common sense, as well as faith, say that this must 
be true ; and we must go back to the old system of the un¬ 
iverse, as well as to the old doctrines of the faith, if we 
would be astronomically as well as theologically sound. We 
are under no obligation to account for certain well known 
astronomical phenomena in harmony with the fact that the 
earth is neither a globe nor in motion, as our business is 
simply to vindicate the truth of Scripture ; nevertheless, we 
believe it can be done ; but even if it were otherwise, we 
should still accept the evidence of the Creator respecting 
“ the earth he has founded upon the seas and established 
upon the floods.” Finally, whatever may be true or f^lse in 
scientific astronomy, no man living can reconcile it with the 
narrative in Joshua, when the impudent assumption is made 
that the stoppage of the earth is meant by the stoppage of 
the SUX ! We at least, believing that holy men of. God 
spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit, accepting 
their testimony reverently without troubling ourselves with 
the question whether it agrees with orthodox theology or 
orthodox science. The Scriptures are right and the savans 
wrong, notwithstanding the wisdom and learning of the latter. 

We ask anv man that has the fear of God in his heart, 
whether the Bible, through which the Creator of the world 
speaks to His creatures, can make all these mistakes about 
the rising, and daily circuit, and setting of the sun ? It is 
one of the pet phrases of the philosophers, that “the Bible 
was not given to teach us science.” We reply, we will not 
allow science to make our Father’s Book a tissue of false¬ 
hoods by the suggestion that its writers said things which 
they knew to be untrue and misleading. 

A r R I C A 





Shortly, I do not believe in converging meridians down 
south, to a South Pole. Nor do I believe in any converging 
meridians to a North Pole either. 

I do not believe in a North Pole, and still less in a Southern 
Pole of the globular hypothesis. I do believe in a North 
Polar Ocean, and also in southern ice ; but to what extent 
both, or either, prevail is certainly a very fair question. For 
instance : in this plan which now appears in .Cady Blount's 
maga'zine, the meridians do not converge to any Noith Pule, 
but to Greenwich, and this I find to be a very long step in a 
right direction. 

This possibility of convergence to Greenwich was pointed 
out by myself many years ago, in a publication I then issued, 
and in which I then charged the astronomers with radiating 
their longitudes actually from Greenwich, and shifting them, 
and the point of radiation, to a suppositious north pole 
situated on the top of an imaginary globe. What I thought 
then, some thirty years ago, I now hold with greater force 
than before. I see that it must be so, and England may be 
proved to be the centre of the earth, and this accounts for 
its comparatively equable climate. 

Other countries have both much colder winters, and also * 
much hotter summers.’ Northern China, for instance, is 
intensely hot in summer, whilst its winter is of such severity 
that the rivers freeze for months at a time, and even the sea 
freezes. Japan, again, has a warm moist summer, and grows 
rice, and even tea, but in winter it suffers greatly from snow 
and the cold is intense. 

Yet only a few hundred miles makes all this difference, 
owing to the sun being of very moderate dimensions, and 
travelling instead of standing stationary, and, in addition, 
being tolerably close to the earth. If the sun were to remain 
stationary we should very soon be burnt to cinders. As it 
is, matters are dangerous enough in some coun